NFT: Apple stock up again...
 

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix....7&p=irol-index

Just saying... :)

Congrats, they finally found a winner with the Ipod.

Did they finally get around to correcting that little problem w/ the Ipod batteries?

Doesn't Bill Gates own about $150 mil in Apple stock?

No idea. What was the problem?

No.

I think the new 40 Gig have removable/changable batteries. Not completelly sure. I hate iPods. That battery thing was such a bitch move by Apple.

The batteries only last a year and half. And since they are polymer (sp?), or molded into the iPod itself, one cannot remove them. Owners would have to send them back to Apple and pay around $180 for a battery change.

Wrong

http://www.bible-prophecy.com/gates.htm

That figure is a little low.

He did up until a year ago.

Vlad - I think he sold the majority of it... IIRC.

Rausch - what Metrolike said: they sealed the units with batteries that have a short lifespan. They could not be replaced other than shipping back to Apple for an overpriced replacement by 'Apple techs'. Reminds me of the old 980 systems.... charging $150 for a gawddamn 3.5" floppy drive!!!! :grr:

Or, even farther back, when they put fuses on the mobo. Simple fuse that cost 20 cents at Radio Shack, they'd charge $200 to replace. Bastards.

Last time I dealt with Apple 'technical support' (I was a tech support guy back in the day) was in regards to Appletalk and TCP/IP.... I needed to know which protocol encapsulated the other for communications over an integrated network. I got bumped all the way up to their 'premeire technical engineering group'... they had no idea what protocol encapsulation meant. :spock:

Needless to say, I've been soured on Apple.

However I wouldn't turn down one of their new 64-bit multi-processor systems. I do CGI work.... Apples are great for graphics work. (of course, that would mean I'd have to get the Apple copies of all my software.... )

If I'm correct (and I'm pretty sure I am), the latest iPod still ahve non-removable, non-replaceable batteries, but they are *supposed* to have a much longer life. Of course, no one has had the latest generation for long enough to tell for sure, but that's what they're telling us...

Exactly...

This was addressed in one of the Apple Expo's by Jobs but for some reason I can't find any info on it.

That whole thing was made WAY too big a deal of, anyway. Jobs bribed Gates into buying the stock (and into continuing to make Office for Mac) in exchange for Jobs not going back to court with Microsoft over trademark infringment. $150 million was small change to Apple, which was about an $11 Billion company at the time. And, of course, it was VERY small change to Gates and MS. The media painted it as if Gates swooped in and saved Apple from the brink of extinction, or something. If I had a penny for every time someone has said Apple was on their detah bed...

The $150 mil was an agreement between Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft would develop Office software for Apple and Apple would drop their "likeness" lawsuits.

The contract was for 5 years and ended in early 03. So, Jobs sold the stock (he could do so because it was a non-voting option that Gates invested in). Basically, it was a $150 million loan.

That clears that up, sorry Brad.

I'll **** something up in the next hour, no worry...

ROFL

Yeah, Jobs out-played Gates. :shake:

The move buy Gates was PURELY business. At the same time it happened they announce Mac Office. Boom, M$ profits. Then they dump a boat load of cash in to Apple, and Apple begins a fast upsurge in sales.

All of a sudden, this VERY small change amounts to HUGE DOLLARS in the M$ monopoly court case because they once again have a thriving competitor and simply get slapped with fines rather than being split up.

I'm not saying Apple was on its death bead, or even close, but to say M$ didn't make out like gang-busters is incorrect. To deny the success brought about by the "collaboration" efforts (Jobs plans, Gates $$$), is to seriously overestimate where Apple was at the time.

Gates, once again, found a way to make money off of Apple. But by no means was that investment "gang-busters."

Hell, Gates pockets more after taxes than the entire worth of Apple...but you're right about it helping his court cases.

That's what I'm referring to. The potential losses if the court found M$ guilty of a monopoly would have been absolutely astronomical.

Hell, there were rumors about M$ moving 150 miles north into Canada if that happened.

Also at the time was the Corel/Novell back and forth with their java-based Office client. Mac Office helped solidify a monopoly within a monopoly.

Mac humpin' show off.

Oh, you're completly right and I don't disagree with you at all. I don't think I said anything that would contradict this, either (you act like you're talking to a Mac bigot, which I most definitely am not).

My only point was that $150 Million investment was then, and still is now, painted by the media as the "day Microsoft saved Apple." That is so absurd, but that's the way it was seen. Apple needed Mac Office. Gates needed to avoid a court case. They made a deal that benefited both sides. Simple as that.

True.

Rereading my response I was a bit harsh, sorry about that.

I've been wondering what the world would be like today if Apple never got into bed with M$.

There would be no microsoft as we know it today...

I still wonder what would have happened if Apple had allowed IBM to license its OS back in the mid-80s... when Apple turned IBM down, Big Blue turned to Windows... and the rest is history.

You can't play Half-Life 2 on a Mac.

Ha-ha! /Nelson

You also have to look at Apple's deal with IBM/Motorola for it's processors. If those processors were in IBM's today instead of a Mac, IBM would be leading the market and Apple would be out of business...

This is totally wrong. You can replace the batteries in ipods.

http://www.ipodbattery.com/

That's nice. But Apple doesn't sell those, I'm guessing those are unofficial. If you do that (open up the iPod on your own) and screw up, Apple is not responsible for it, so you'd have to purchase a new one.

I've listened to an actual recording of a person speaking to an Apple tech support and he said they'd have to send the iPod in to replace the battery.

I guess it costs $99 to replace a battery after a year of using the iPod.

http://www.apple.com/batteries/replacements.html

Let me see if I can find the link to the conversation.

I guess they were wrong about the polymer battery, unless it was on the old models, hmm.

Found the link, judge for yourself whether that's real (it was made a long time ago)... idk.

http://www.ipodsdirtysecret.com/

Rausch, I like your "Mac" mentality.

Without Apple, there's no Microsoft.

(I'm serious)

Wow, bill gates is the reason apple is doing good now.. the shame.. looks like the apple users will have to find another bill gates free system..

dont ye hate when you dont read a whole thread... ROFL