Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #325330 > unrolled thread

Micro$oft's smartphone debacle

Started bychrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
First post2015-10-07 12:29 -0500
Last post2015-10-08 09:36 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 148 — 19 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy


Contents

  Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-07 12:29 -0500
    You've got that wrong... it is LINUX that is deemed the kiss of death. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-07 14:58 -0600
    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-07 20:31 -0400
      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-08 02:37 +0200
        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-07 21:17 -0400
          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-08 03:37 +0200
            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-07 20:42 -0500
              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-08 03:50 +0200
                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-08 07:12 -0500
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 12:48 +0000
              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-10-08 12:14 +0100
                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 12:13 +0000
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 09:48 -0400
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-08 16:50 +0200
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-08 10:18 -0500
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 16:14 +0000
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-10-09 10:18 +0100
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-09 09:58 -0400
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-10-12 09:36 +0100
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-09 11:05 -0400
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-09 14:10 -0600
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-09 14:09 -0600
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 12:16 -0400
              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 09:42 -0400
              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-08 12:22 -0400
                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 16:25 +0000
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 12:33 -0400
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 12:39 -0400
            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 09:41 -0400
          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-08 13:13 +0100
            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 08:45 -0400
            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-08 13:30 -0400
              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 17:43 +0000
                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-08 20:07 +0200
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 18:10 +0000
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-08 14:18 -0400
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-08 23:36 -0600
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-09 10:58 -0400
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-08 14:22 -0400
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-08 13:26 -0500
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:10 +0000
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:28 +0000
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:57 +0000
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 17:01 -0400
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 21:03 +0000
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 17:09 -0400
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 21:14 +0000
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 17:17 -0400
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 17:40 -0400
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 22:02 +0000
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 18:21 -0400
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 16:00 -0700
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-09 10:20 -0500
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-09 06:55 -0500
                    Says the phoney with his imaginary BSEE.  LOL!!! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-08 23:36 -0600
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:26 +0000
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 21:01 +0000
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 17:04 -0400
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 21:06 +0000
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 17:10 -0400
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-08 19:38 -0400
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 19:42 -0400
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 00:07 +0000
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 20:14 -0400
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 00:19 +0000
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 20:44 -0400
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 00:53 +0000
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 20:55 -0400
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-09 08:21 -0400
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-09 10:33 -0500
                                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:13 +0000
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 20:57 -0400
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 01:18 +0000
                                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-09 08:23 -0400
                                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 12:27 +0000
                                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-09 11:09 -0400
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-09 09:31 -0400
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-09 10:25 -0500
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-09 10:46 -0500
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:17 +0000
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-10 10:30 -0700
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-09 19:19 -0400
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-09 11:53 -0400
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:18 +0000
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-09 12:29 -0400
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-09 16:13 -0500
                                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-10 16:08 -0500
                                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-10 19:53 -0500
                                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-11 01:17 -0500
                                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-11 02:34 -0500
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 10:24 -0700
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 17:48 +0000
                                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 11:24 -0700
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-09 12:32 -0400
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-09 12:41 -0400
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-09 16:15 -0500
                                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-12 08:06 -0500
                                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-12 13:09 +0000
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:15 +0000
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-09 14:33 -0400
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 00:17 +0000
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 17:27 -0700
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 00:30 +0000
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 17:56 -0700
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 20:58 -0400
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-09 10:35 -0500
                                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:12 +0000
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-09 10:45 -0400
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 14:59 +0000
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-09 11:19 -0400
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 15:24 +0000
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-09 18:26 +0200
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:27 +0000
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-09 14:14 -0600
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-12 09:26 -0500
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-12 14:33 +0000
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-12 09:16 -0700
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-12 16:29 +0000
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-12 09:57 -0500
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-09 19:52 -0400
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-10 08:35 -0400
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-10 11:13 -0400
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-10 14:23 -0600
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd  E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-10 15:40 -0500
                            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-10 21:30 -0600
                              Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd  E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-10-11 07:30 -0500
                                Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-11 11:57 -0600
                                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 18:14 +0000
                                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-11 16:03 -0600
                                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 22:31 +0000
                                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-13 13:51 -0600
                  Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-10-08 19:37 -0400
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> - 2015-10-08 19:41 -0400
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 00:03 +0000
                    Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-09 07:35 -0500
                      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 12:52 +0000
                        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-09 09:38 -0400
                          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-09 11:11 -0400
          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-08 07:22 -0500
        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-08 07:29 -0500
        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 09:37 -0400
          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-08 16:46 +0200
            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 12:10 -0400
        Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-09 19:49 -0400
          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-10 10:59 -0400
          Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-10 17:03 +0200
            Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-13 09:10 -0400
      Re: Micro$oft's smartphone debacle "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-08 09:36 -0400

Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →


#325588

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 20:10 +0000
Message-ID<d7o0t7FffurU4@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#325571
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:

> Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
>> Lying Lloyd wrote:
>>> 
>>> The one place you don't want to be in phones is with Android. Between
>>> Samsung sucking up the majority of the profits, the Chinese low
>>> quality mfgs picking up almost all of what's left, there just isn't
>>> any money to be made making an Android phone for anyone else.
> 
> LOL  What a dumbass.
> 
> No matter what the company, the manufacturing will be done in a low-cost
> country like China, "Lloyd".
> 
>> Bullshit.
> 
> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be is
> in a healthy, competitive market."

more crap from you.  I didn't mention where they were made, I was talking 
about the Chinese Androids that are being made and sold by Chinese 
companies, not the mfgs that do that for others.

But regardless, if you aren't Samsung, you aren't making money selling 
Android products.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325592

Fromronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 20:28 +0000
Message-ID<mv6jkn$jrj$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#325571
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:

> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be is
> in a healthy, competitive market."

The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly where his 
beloved Apple is gouging their gullible customers.

-- 
Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325596

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 20:57 +0000
Message-ID<d7o3ldFg9i8U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#325592
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000, ronb wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
> 
>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be
>> is in a healthy, competitive market."
> 
> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly where his
> beloved Apple is gouging their gullible customers.

Since Apple is neither a monopoly nor are they gouging their customers 
I'll note your non-sequitor.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325599

FromOnion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org>
Date2015-10-08 17:01 -0400
Message-ID<1b69pb629h9s7.1pxr8pn6wiea$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#325592
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
> 
>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be is
>> in a healthy, competitive market."
> 
> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly 

You mean like Samsung has?
Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on each
Android cell phone they sell.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325602

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 21:03 +0000
Message-ID<d7o41lFg9i8U4@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#325599
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>> 
>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be
>>> is in a healthy, competitive market."
>> 
>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
> 
> You mean like Samsung has?
> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on each
> Android cell phone they sell.

Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair 
while now.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325607

FromOnion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org>
Date2015-10-08 17:09 -0400
Message-ID<znolk219v7vu.jgc2m0tzdw2t.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#325602
On 8 Oct 2015 21:03:50 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be
>>>> is in a healthy, competitive market."
>>> 
>>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
>> 
>> You mean like Samsung has?
>> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on each
>> Android cell phone they sell.
> 
> Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair 
> while now.

Yes, but they are the only ones making decent money from Android.
If the business blogs are correct of course.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325609

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 21:14 +0000
Message-ID<d7o4m4Fg9i8U6@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#325607
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:09:32 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:

> On 8 Oct 2015 21:03:50 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to
>>>>> be is in a healthy, competitive market."
>>>> 
>>>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
>>> 
>>> You mean like Samsung has?
>>> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on
>>> each Android cell phone they sell.
>> 
>> Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair
>> while now.
> 
> Yes, but they are the only ones making decent money from Android.
> If the business blogs are correct of course.

Correct.  But it is declining according to most of the business blogs and 
reports.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325610

FromOnion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org>
Date2015-10-08 17:17 -0400
Message-ID<1c8d8if7o8uaw.9gz11yo47nws$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#325609
On 8 Oct 2015 21:14:45 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:09:32 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
> 
>> On 8 Oct 2015 21:03:50 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to
>>>>>> be is in a healthy, competitive market."
>>>>> 
>>>>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
>>>> 
>>>> You mean like Samsung has?
>>>> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on
>>>> each Android cell phone they sell.
>>> 
>>> Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair
>>> while now.
>> 
>> Yes, but they are the only ones making decent money from Android.
>> If the business blogs are correct of course.
> 
> Correct.  But it is declining according to most of the business blogs and 
> reports.

Correct.

I suspect the Chinese companies marketing Android devices under their own
brand are going to steamroll the others. Paritally because of their playing
around with the value of their currency.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325613

From"A.M" <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-08 17:40 -0400
Message-ID<mv6nof$6oq$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#325602
On 2015-10-08 5:03 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be
>>>> is in a healthy, competitive market."
>>>
>>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
>>
>> You mean like Samsung has?
>> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on each
>> Android cell phone they sell.
> 
> Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair 
> while now.

Maybe Android is on its way out and the manufacturers are refusing to
admit it. I can't imagine a business and the operating system it uses
thriving for very long if no one is making any money.


-- 
A.M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325619

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 22:02 +0000
Message-ID<d7o7enFh86bU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#325613
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:40:28 -0400, A.M wrote:

> On 2015-10-08 5:03 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to
>>>>> be is in a healthy, competitive market."
>>>>
>>>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
>>>
>>> You mean like Samsung has?
>>> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on
>>> each Android cell phone they sell.
>> 
>> Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair
>> while now.
> 
> Maybe Android is on its way out and the manufacturers are refusing to
> admit it. I can't imagine a business and the operating system it uses
> thriving for very long if no one is making any money.

Me either.  Of course, Google is in the cat bird's seat since they don't 
depend on Android itself to make their profits.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325620

FromOnion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org>
Date2015-10-08 18:21 -0400
Message-ID<14vxsif3h81j8.xrp9yqp577ok$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#325619
On 8 Oct 2015 22:02:00 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:40:28 -0400, A.M wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-10-08 5:03 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to
>>>>>> be is in a healthy, competitive market."
>>>>>
>>>>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
>>>>
>>>> You mean like Samsung has?
>>>> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on
>>>> each Android cell phone they sell.
>>> 
>>> Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair
>>> while now.
>> 
>> Maybe Android is on its way out and the manufacturers are refusing to
>> admit it. I can't imagine a business and the operating system it uses
>> thriving for very long if no one is making any money.
> 
> Me either.  Of course, Google is in the cat bird's seat since they don't 
> depend on Android itself to make their profits.

Google is going to be THE major player because people are getting pissed
off with depending upon the carriers for updates.

Coupled with the China low priced devices and companies like Samsung will
be out of the market due to lack of profit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325628

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 16:00 -0700
Message-ID<9e976426-2d1d-4f4d-8dd6-955d62fe1ede@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#325619
On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 4:02:05 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:40:28 -0400, A.M wrote:
> 
> > On 2015-10-08 5:03 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> >> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:01:14 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to
> >>>>> be is in a healthy, competitive market."
> >>>>
> >>>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly
> >>>
> >>> You mean like Samsung has?
> >>> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on
> >>> each Android cell phone they sell.
> >> 
> >> Shit, ask Samsung!  They have had falling sales and profits for a fair
> >> while now.
> > 
> > Maybe Android is on its way out and the manufacturers are refusing to
> > admit it. I can't imagine a business and the operating system it uses
> > thriving for very long if no one is making any money.
> 
> Me either.  Of course, Google is in the cat bird's seat since they don't 
> depend on Android itself to make their profits.

Google derives a ton of their revenue from ads (which use javascript) and Android users are a huge target. No one in COLA seems to do web development so this is not something you're likely to hear much about (I certainly haven't done much research yet) but one serious problem with Android is that its javascript performance is poor compared to iOS. Additionally, Apple has gotten more serious with the ad blocking. It's not a huge stretch to believe these things are what prompted Google's latest move with AMP (aka their 'Accelerated Mobile Pages' project), a thing for which the implementation isn't being well received by many in the web development community. But Google can play a card Apple can't... they're considering down ranking for non-compliance to AMP. Realistically, it's a good (albeit, powerplay) move on their part at this point in time but it could blow up in their face. Granted, too many people go nuts with all the crap they load and then JS' single threaded, blocking nature becomes more of an issue, but it's the end user who pays for their trade off decision. I'd rather have less ads (or none when I don't want to see them)  and retain a decent user experience, but the concept behind AMP seems to be to pare things way down, even to the point of removing 3rd party javascript while still allowing ads (maybe sandboxed, but still...). Personally, I don't like it at all but in order to help Android compete  better with iOS in this respect (and retain their ad revenue) they may feel they have no choice. Too bad they have so much power in this regard. I can actually see a lot of people switching to BIng at that point.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325788

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-09 10:20 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn1fmpe.gdg.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#325599
On 2015-10-08, Onion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:28:07 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:26:55 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>> 
>>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be is
>>> in a healthy, competitive market."
>> 
>> The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly 
>
> You mean like Samsung has?

    Any Samsung customer can change to any other Android vendor whenever
they like. Your argument makes as much sense as trying to call the lead
PC vendor a monopoly.

> Ask HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony, etc how much money they are making on each
> Android cell phone they sell.

    What aspects of a monopoly does Samsung have? Be specific. Be relevant
to the law (rather than vernacular definitions).

    "Most profitable" isn't one of the criteria.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325744

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-09 06:55 -0500
Message-ID<h5af1btm26tvvnhcma35l07tgmpfal6sue@4ax.com>
In reply to#325592
ronb wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be is
>> in a healthy, competitive market."
>
>The only "business plan" "Lloyd" can understand is a monopoly where his 
>beloved Apple is gouging their gullible customers.

Apple has no monopoly, but they are in an enviable position in the
phone market, being the only supplier of the only "big" alternative to
Android.  Plus, like it or not, a good chunk of the market perceives
them as the best/coolest.

I don't begrudge them their success, but, unlike the "Lloyd"
ignoramous, I understand that their level success of the past decade
has been freakish, and that other companies cannot, generally, expect
anything close to that kind of success, and that's OK.

-- 
"It is better that there only be one supplier who really is the best
so that everyone can have the best choice!"  -  Rat

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325721 — Says the phoney with his imaginary BSEE. LOL!!!

FromGreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>
Date2015-10-08 23:36 -0600
SubjectSays the phoney with his imaginary BSEE. LOL!!!
Message-ID<SbqdnVMsAcv0z4rLnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@bresnan.com>
In reply to#325571
On 10/08/15 12:26, chrisv wrote:
> Melzzzzz wrote:
>
>> Lying Lloyd wrote:
>>>
>>> The one place you don't want to be in phones is with Android.
>>> Between Samsung sucking up the majority of the profits, the Chinese
>>> low quality mfgs picking up almost all of what's left, there just
>>> isn't any money to be made making an Android phone for anyone else.
>
> LOL  What a dumbass.
>
> No matter what the company, the manufacturing will be done in a
> low-cost country like China, "Lloyd".
>
>> Bullshit.
>
> The dumbass may as well have said "The one place you don't want to be
> is in a healthy, competitive market."
>


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325590

Fromronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 20:26 +0000
Message-ID<mv6jhl$jrj$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#325564
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:07:12 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:

> On 8 Oct 2015 17:43:31 GMT Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> The one place you don't want to be in phones is with Android. Between
>> Samsung sucking up the majority of the profits, the Chinese low quality
>> mfgs picking up almost all of what's left, there just isn't any money
>> to be made making an Android phone for anyone else.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> Bullshit.

Where does the lemon-sucking, bitter old biddy "Lloyd" thinks iPhones are 
made? Elf Land? 

But "somehow" Android has managed to take 80% - 85% of the worldwide 
market. And Windows Phone is ... where? Under 5%? iPhones at about 12%? 
Yeah, Apple's and Windows' phones are taking the world by storm. NOT. 

-- 
Zero tolerance for WinDrones and iCultists

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325600

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 21:01 +0000
Message-ID<d7o3thFg9i8U2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#325590
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:26:29 +0000, ronb wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:07:12 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
>> On 8 Oct 2015 17:43:31 GMT Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> The one place you don't want to be in phones is with Android. Between
>>> Samsung sucking up the majority of the profits, the Chinese low
>>> quality mfgs picking up almost all of what's left, there just isn't
>>> any money to be made making an Android phone for anyone else.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> Bullshit.
> 
> Where does the lemon-sucking, bitter old biddy "Lloyd" thinks iPhones
> are made? Elf Land?
> 
> But "somehow" Android has managed to take 80% - 85% of the worldwide
> market. And Windows Phone is ... where? Under 5%? iPhones at about 12%?
> Yeah, Apple's and Windows' phones are taking the world by storm. NOT.

Yes, Android has taken a huge part of the phone market.  Mostly in mid-
range and low-end phones.  But I wasn't talking about market share since 
market share is nearly meaningless to a company when they start counting 
the money.

And when they do that and see how much of their 'revenue' actually stayed 
in their hands, profit IOW in case you didn't know, they find that if 
they aren't Samsung they got fucked!  And even Samsung is feeling the 
pain as sales are lower as are profits.  They are getting hammered at the 
high end by Apple and at the low end by the Chinese brands.

And yeah, WP has a small market share though there are pockets that they 
are doing better in.  That may or may not change going forward, but I 
think MS is making some good moves in phone space.  Now they need to 
figure out how to get developers, especially those doing 'corporate' type 
apps to do some for WP.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325603

FromOnion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org>
Date2015-10-08 17:04 -0400
Message-ID<qz3thpf28cxl$.1722roy2e287n$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#325590
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:26:29 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:07:12 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
>> On 8 Oct 2015 17:43:31 GMT Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> The one place you don't want to be in phones is with Android. Between
>>> Samsung sucking up the majority of the profits, the Chinese low quality
>>> mfgs picking up almost all of what's left, there just isn't any money
>>> to be made making an Android phone for anyone else.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> Bullshit.
> 
> Where does the lemon-sucking, bitter old biddy "Lloyd" thinks iPhones are 
> made? Elf Land? 

He's not talking about where the phones are made, you idiot.
He's talking about ultra cheap phones being sold by Chinese companies under
their own brand.

Like Huawei for example.

God are you Linux loons ignorant.


> But "somehow" Android has managed to take 80% - 85% of the worldwide 
> market. And Windows Phone is ... where? Under 5%? iPhones at about 12%? 
> Yeah, Apple's and Windows' phones are taking the world by storm. NOT.

Lol!
You are truly clueless.

What is so funny is how you support that other idiot Chris Asstorm's
comments about Sam Adams beer making a higher profit but when it comes to
Apple you ignore the same theory.

You Linux loons are truly the biggest assholes on the planet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325605

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 21:06 +0000
Message-ID<d7o45qFg9i8U5@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#325603
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:04:33 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:26:29 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:07:12 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8 Oct 2015 17:43:31 GMT Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> The one place you don't want to be in phones is with Android. Between
>>>> Samsung sucking up the majority of the profits, the Chinese low
>>>> quality mfgs picking up almost all of what's left, there just isn't
>>>> any money to be made making an Android phone for anyone else.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> Bullshit.
>> 
>> Where does the lemon-sucking, bitter old biddy "Lloyd" thinks iPhones
>> are made? Elf Land?
> 
> He's not talking about where the phones are made, you idiot.
> He's talking about ultra cheap phones being sold by Chinese companies
> under their own brand.
> 
> Like Huawei for example.
> 
> God are you Linux loons ignorant.
>
No, in this case they full well knew what I was talking about but since 
that wouldn't look good to them, they had to do the side-shuffle.
 
> 
>> But "somehow" Android has managed to take 80% - 85% of the worldwide
>> market. And Windows Phone is ... where? Under 5%? iPhones at about 12%?
>> Yeah, Apple's and Windows' phones are taking the world by storm. NOT.
> 
> Lol!
> You are truly clueless.
> 
> What is so funny is how you support that other idiot Chris Asstorm's
> comments about Sam Adams beer making a higher profit but when it comes
> to Apple you ignore the same theory.
> 
> You Linux loons are truly the biggest assholes on the planet.





-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#325608

FromOnion Knight <onionknight@linuxmail.org>
Date2015-10-08 17:10 -0400
Message-ID<1xbll3cds63xg.13qktb5jyfnns.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#325605
On 8 Oct 2015 21:06:02 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 17:04:33 -0400, Onion Knight wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:26:29 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:07:12 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 8 Oct 2015 17:43:31 GMT Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> The one place you don't want to be in phones is with Android. Between
>>>>> Samsung sucking up the majority of the profits, the Chinese low
>>>>> quality mfgs picking up almost all of what's left, there just isn't
>>>>> any money to be made making an Android phone for anyone else.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Bullshit.
>>> 
>>> Where does the lemon-sucking, bitter old biddy "Lloyd" thinks iPhones
>>> are made? Elf Land?
>> 
>> He's not talking about where the phones are made, you idiot.
>> He's talking about ultra cheap phones being sold by Chinese companies
>> under their own brand.
>> 
>> Like Huawei for example.
>> 
>> God are you Linux loons ignorant.
>>
> No, in this case they full well knew what I was talking about but since 
> that wouldn't look good to them, they had to do the side-shuffle.

I should have put ignorant in quotes.
That's what I meant.
They know, but they won't admit.

  
>> 
>>> But "somehow" Android has managed to take 80% - 85% of the worldwide
>>> market. And Windows Phone is ... where? Under 5%? iPhones at about 12%?
>>> Yeah, Apple's and Windows' phones are taking the world by storm. NOT.
>> 
>> Lol!
>> You are truly clueless.
>> 
>> What is so funny is how you support that other idiot Chris Asstorm's
>> comments about Sam Adams beer making a higher profit but when it comes
>> to Apple you ignore the same theory.
>> 
>> You Linux loons are truly the biggest assholes on the planet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy


csiph-web