作者: YAYA小葉叔叔
如果市場那麼容易被看透
還需要經濟學者幹嘛
愛配不就是一台平版媒體
或許真的吹起一陣漣漪
但他卻無法真正取代誰
消費性電子的不可測
的確是需要領導先驅
但是先驅卻不會是唯一
萬變的市場
連阿婆自己都不敢說
自家的愛配能取代誰～贏過誰
市場不是阿婆或是任何人創造的
市場是消費者創造的
合乎消費者使用～願意花錢買
那就是贏家
我不該討論這個問題的 抱歉了
我比較贊同樓上說的,媒體總會預設立場(或是拿錢寫報導?!)
安全性而言APPLE的東西真的很弱(不只IOS)
ipad不會也不可能取代電腦(因為她還要itune同步,管理)
INTEL也不會是輸家,遠端的雲端運算不用機器嗎?
消費者會挑符合自己需求的產品.
對我來說我只想要一個大畫面的網路終端裝置透過SSH管理我的路由器而已,
其他的功能就是加分項目了....
最糟糕的大概是M$,因為是競爭對手的關係,自家產品拼輸人就算了,行銷也沒有很成功....
只能說風水輪流轉吧?
我不該討論這個問題的 抱歉了
首先我想先說的是
每個人都有他的職業，也因為他的本分，所以他做他該做的事情
媒體需要 能夠激起討論、或是能點發大火的話題來報導 這樣他們才能交差，才有人看
同樣這些號稱分析師、經濟學者，也是在他們領域上，所看到的面相，來寫出一堆東西，然後發表、投稿，希望有人注意到他，有人看到這內容
當然內容的部分，是否預先預設好目標（例如他的客戶喜歡看什麼，或是他的客戶都買哪些股票）然後頭其所好
事情總是一體多面
沒人保證未來會怎樣
頂多從自身的經驗與所遇到的狀況來做分享
所以我沒有說誰不好，或是看不起誰
而是要表達的是
人各有志，也都有自己的工作，也都有自己得面對的客戶
人們總是挑自己喜歡看的看，自動掠過不想看、不喜歡看的內容
大家要藉由各種角度的分析，來強化自己的判斷能力，進而轉變成自己的創造力，來避免重蹈覆轍
這樣就最棒啦
我基本上也贊同吉米大的意見，多吸收各方面的資訊來強化判斷力，避免情緒性的發言，因為隨著技術的進步，很多事情早已非一般角度能簡言之，尤其是工程這種東西…
我曾讀過一些 mac 駭客如 Charles Miller 分享的意見，傳統上，不停地發佈 patch 是一種作法，但是以資安的角度來看，漏洞是補不完的，還可能會越補越大洞；另有一種作法，像是：Sandboxing 技術，則是在系統中築起一道巨大高牆，降低(內、外)翻閱城牆、互通有無的機會，比較能因應將來複雜的軟體生態。因此，以往以漏洞多寡來評斷作業系統好壞的想法，可得要修正了。
Update:
才剛回完文，就正好讀到一篇不要依賴 Sandboxing 技術的文一併貼出來供參考…XD
此篇文章於 08-10-2010 20:39 被 eeptman 編輯。
中毒、中木馬和安不安全不能混為一談
資安在所有系統上都存在，惡意程式也都有
只是有沒有人去寫而已，Windows 市佔率高當然是他多
等哪天 Mac OS 市佔跟 Windows 平起平坐的時候就...
首先我想先說的是
每個人都有他的職業，也因為他的本分，所以他做他該做的事情
媒體需要 能夠激起討論、或是能點發大火的話題來報導 這樣他們才能交差，才有人看
同樣這些號稱分析師、經濟學者，也是在他們領域上，所看到的面相，來寫出一堆東西，然後發表、投稿，希望有人注意到他，有人看到這內容
當然內容的部分，是否預先預設好目標（例如他的客戶喜歡看什麼，或是他的客戶都買哪些股票）然後頭其所好
事情總是一體多面
沒人保證未來會怎樣
頂多從自身的經驗與所遇到的狀況來做分享
所以我沒有說誰不好，或是看不起誰
而是要表達的是
人各有志，也都有自己的工作，也都有自己得面對的客戶
人們總是挑自己喜歡看的看，自動掠過不想看、不喜歡看的內容
大家要藉由各種角度的分析，來強化自己的判斷能力，進而轉變成自己的創造力，來避免重蹈覆轍
這樣就最棒啦
不過有人提出 這沒有討論的必要
所以我就不討論啦～
抱歉!!
並不是刻意針對誰
只是～每個人都有自己的立場與看法
我也超想要一台愛配
只是看見這種打倒誰～取代誰的文章
感覺不是很好
當然文章是針對某些族群所寫
但是看文章的人應該培養
對文章抱持存疑的態度來看
不但能更中立更能增加視野
我嘗試去找這篇文章的原文,但是很可惜沒有找到（也可能我不夠認真 XD）
我想這篇文章不是在講打倒誰取代誰
而是在講趨勢的情況,當這一類裝置越來越多（可不是只有IPAD,可是ipad最紅啊 當然抓它出來講)哪些產業會受到衝擊 他說的也可能是錯的 也可能什麼衝擊都沒有 就是硬被apple找到一個新市場
我也只是提供我想法罷了
不過產業裡面決定產品要不要推出或是走什麼方向的人大多不是經濟學家
研究市場趨勢的人也大多沒有經濟學背景 XD 至少我知道的是這樣啦
原文 Link
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/02/business/02views.html
Apple sold 3.3 million iPads last quarter. That is one of the best starts ever for a consumer electronic device. It could sell 25 million of the electronic tablets next year, based on the trajectory of past consumer hits.
While Apple and its suppliers are celebrating, many other companies will suffer. Breakingviews has compiled a list of the potential losers, from the obvious to the indirect:
PC MAKERS AND SELLERS It stands to reason that if companies and consumers buy iPads, they will cut back on competing electronic items because of budget limits. This effect probably has not fully kicked in. Early adopters are more willing to splurge on a new gadget.
Yet Barclays Capital points out there are already signs of cannibalization. The number of lower-price netbooks sold fell 19 percent in June compared with last year, according to NPD. Hewlett-Packard, Dell and Acer earn little money on selling these devices. But if the iPad starts to cannibalize their higher-margin items, selling PCs could become a recipe for losses. Dell, for example, eked out less than a 3 percent net margin last year.
MICROSOFT It doesn’t take the I.Q. of Bill Gates to figure out that reduced sales of computers running Windows would hurt Microsoft.
True, the company’s most recent quarterly figures were robust, as users upgraded to Windows 7. But if PC cannibalization occurs, it won’t be pretty. The company’s Windows division has astonishingly high margins: it accounts for roughly a quarter of sales but half of operating profit. A small revenue decline would disproportionately drag down earnings.
INTEL AND A.M.D. A shift from PCs to the iPad would also hurt the two big semiconductor makers. Instead of using a chip whose roots lie in desktop computing where Intel has its stronghold, Apple used one from the cellphone world. Intel might catch up in designing low-power chips, but if it didn’t, it could lose its quasi-monopoly margins. Advanced Micro Devices, which chases after Intel yet never catches up, would take a harsher hit.
SOFTWARE SECURITY COMPANIES Apple’s devices are generally perceived as having fewer security holes than Windows. While most PC users install antiviral programs, many Apple users don’t bother. So an iPad shift would hit software sales at security companies like McAfee and Symantec.
Certainly, the more popular Apple’s systems become, the more effort hackers will make to crack them. But over all, antiviral vendors look like potential losers.
HARD DISK DRIVE MAKERS Apple was one of the first computer makers to eschew floppy disk drives. Likewise, the iPad could lead the charge away from hard disk drives.
The iPad uses NAND flash memory, which is smaller and uses less power than the hard drives commonly used in laptops and desktops. If the iPad cannibalizes these markets, companies like Western Digital and Seagate would suffer. Moreover, Apple is believed to use a third of the world’s supply of this memory. If it demands more, companies like Samsung would be encouraged to ramp up production. That could be a recipe for an eventual price crash and consequent use of NAND in more consumer devices.
CELLPHONE PRODUCERS Apple says about half of the Fortune 100 companies are testing the device. AT&T says that business demand for the device is robust.
The iPad and the iPhone essentially use the same operating system, so the tablet could act as a Trojan horse for the handset: if companies let employees use one, they might as well let them use the other. And since applications developed for the iPad often work equally well on the iPhone, the platform is more attractive for developers. Nokia and Research In Motion appear in danger of losing the app battle. If their phones are regarded as undifferentiated commodities, their profit margins could vaporize.
BOOKSTORES Other forms of collateral damage may seem surprising. Take bookstores. It seems clear that most texts will eventually be sold and consumed electronically. Amazon, Barnes & Noble and Borders sell devices specialized for reading. Yet the iPad’s introduction set off a vicious price war in e-readers, as Amazon just dropped the price for the Kindle to as low as $139.
That suggests consumers prefer gadgets like the iPad that can read e-mail messages, play games and download apps that perform other tasks. True, book retailers have iPad apps that allow for the easy purchase of electronic books. But consumers can download several and easily compare prices. Increased competition means margins are likely to fall. ROBERT CYRAN
此篇文章於 08-12-2010 02:33 被 kikilab 編輯。 原因: add 原文
樓主只是將 ”文章“ 跟大家分享並不是樓主說出來的
理性的討論才是重點
大家一起互相討論吧!!!
發文規則
廣 告
