$59.00, found by laurencomfort https://svpply.com/laurencomfort
via Svpply https://svpply.com/item/3383477
Download CAD Drawings | AutoCAD Blocks | AutoCAD Symbols | CAD Drawings
While Apple customers were lining up Sept. 20 to get their new iPhones or downloading iOS 7, one of the companies less prominent products, the Apple TV set-top box, experienced a rocky start with the release of its new operating system.
Apple TV 6.0, which added the same iTunes Radio functionality as iOS 7, plus some unexpected new convenience tools, was released the same week as that mobile operating system. But the system update was completely withdrawn shortly afterward when some customers reported losing some of their digital library items, slow download speeds and, in a few instances, a horrible phenomenon in the personal computing realm known as “bricking.” This is when corrupted firmware basically renders a piece of technology totally dead, and some Apple TVs were reportedly no more functional than square, black hockey pucks after the upgrade.
For those who are relatively new to the concept. Apple TV, Roku and Google’s new Chromecast dongle are unassuming and relatively inexpensive components for streaming content to high-definition televisions. Google’s unit is by far the cheapest at $35, allowing users to stream YouTube, Netflix and Google Play purchases, and it’s barely bigger than the average USB flash drive. Roku recently released new versions of its small cubes, which offer a vast collection of channels in addition to the Netflix and HBO Go portals. Apple TV is the usual choice for people whose media resides in the iTunes universe, and it offers a user interface that makes navigation almost completely uniform on services such as Hulu Plus, Netflix, Vevo, YouTube, WATCH Disney Channel and HBO Go, plus it can play content from iPhones and iPads through the AirPlay function.
The new 5s and 5c. the demand is clearly there.
They really do spend a great arm in terms of how to grow a hit brand from the experience you have on their products to the experience you have inside their retail stores.
They are a great -- they are great and really set the bar.
That does not mean that coca- cola does not own a fantastic business.
Google is seeking in between them and apple to be the new number two.
What are the biggest factors that go into determining if the brand is worth more than 98 billion dollars?
There are three elements we look at.
The first is earnings, the heart of this.
What we're trying to do is demonstrate how much money the brand actually makes for the business.
We start by looking at the earnings stream.
We use things like bloomberg for the same things as all the other analysts use.
How important is it in the purchase process?
The third is what we call brand strength, which is taking a deep dive into loyalty, looking at 10 different factors that determine how far into the future it brand might be able to deliver earnings for that owner.
You have at least a half dozen technology companies on this total list.
Compare hominy technology names have take, very powerful brands -- have big, very powerful brands today versus five years ago and you can see it on the list.
If you take a look at the top 10, you have apple and google at the top, with ibm, samsung, ge.
At the same time we have two very well known tech companies dropping off the list.
Blackberry dropped off this year as well as yahoo.
Household names like nokia have been having really tough times.
We all know they have just been bought by microsoft.
Their brand fell by almost 60%. also nintendo.
It is not an easy game.
You can be up and quickly be down in the world of technology.
Before we go, coca-cola had a 13 year run at the top of your list.
How long do you think apple can stay number one?
That is a very good question.
As we know they are locked in a battle with samsung for the smart phone market.
Samsung playing the long-term game, perhaps with more ultimate issue.
Apple having tremendous service capabilities, which gives them an advantage in the long-term.
Then you go through google, facebook, and twitter next year.
It is not going to be easy for them to stay on the top.
We appreciate the insight.
Emily, back to you.
This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.
Apple (AAPL) has unseated Coca-Cola as the world’s No. 1 brand, as the company founded by Steve Jobs is a leader in design and performance, according to a study of the Top 100 brands by Interbrand Corp.
Apple Inc.’s brand value jumped 28 percent to $98.3 billion and Google Inc. (GOOG)’s rose in second place at $93.3 billion. The Coca-Cola Co. name slipped from the top spot after 13 years to third place at $79.2 billion.
“Every so often, a company changes our lives -- not just with its products, but with its ethos,” Jez Frampton, chief executive officer at New York-based brand consultancy Interbrand, said in a statement. Current Apple CEO “Tim Cook has assembled a solid leadership team and has kept Steve Jobs’ vision intact -- a vision that has allowed Apple to deliver on its promise of innovation time and time again.”
The annual study, closely watched by the industry, determines a brand’s value by examining its financial performance, role in influencing consumer buying and ability to secure earnings. The Top 10 is rounded out in descending order by IBM, Microsoft, GE, McDonald’s, Samsung, Intel and Toyota. The 100 have a combined value of $1.5 trillion, an 8.4 percent increase from last year.
Technology names were among the biggest climbers -- and the biggest decliners as well. Google’s brand value rose 34 percent and Samsung’s advanced 20 percent. Meanwhile, Nokia dropped to 57th place from 19th with the largest decline in brand value in the history of the 14-year study. Yahoo and BlackBerry fell off the rankings altogether.
The shifts in many of the brands’ placements reflects the turmoil in the technology industry over the past year. Nokia Oyj (NOK1V) -- which had the largest share of the mobile-handset market until it was overtaken by Samsung Electronics Co. in 2012 -- was split this month when Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) agreed to buy the Finnish company’s phone business for 5.44 billion euros ($7.34 billion). As part of the deal, Microsoft licensed the Nokia brand for a decade just for the low-end models. Fancier devices won’t get the Nokia name any more.
Last week, smartphone pioneer BlackBerry Ltd. said a group led by Toronto-based insurance company Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd. (FFH) signed a letter of intent for a $4.7 billion buyout. The company is cutting a third of its staff and refocusing just on business customers after the products once so popular they were known as CrackBerries lost favor to Apple and Samsung handsets, which offered better Web browsing and wider ranges of applications.
New names on the Interbrand list include Discovery, Duracell and Chevrolet. The fastest-rising brands were Apple, Facebook, Prada, Google and Amazon.
To contact the reporter on this story: Kristen Schweizer in London at kschweizer1@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Kenneth Wong at kwong11@bloomberg.net.
For the first time in its 13-year history, Interbrand has a new leader of its annual study of the most valuable brand names: Apple.
The iPhone maker bumped Coca-Cola, which had led the study since it began in 2000, with a brand value that Interbrand assessed at $98.3 billion. And reflecting the rising importance of technology in global business and consumer consciousness, Google came in at second place with a brand value of $93.3 billion, well ahead of the soft drink maker's $79.2 billion value.
Not everyone fared as well in the tech world. As Samsung rose from ninth to eight place with a 20 percent brand value in increase, it traded positions with Intel, which dropped 5 percent.
Interbrand bases its assessment on a combination of the company's financial performance, its role influencing consumer choices, and how well the brand lets a company charge premium prices and deliver profits.
"Every so often, a company changes our lives -- not just with its products, but with its ethos. This is why...Apple now ranks No. 1," said Jez Frampton, Interbrand's global chief executive officer in a statement Monday. The report (PDF) added a cautionary note amid paragraphs of lavish praise: "The focus for the future is clear: Apple must succeed in slowing Samsung's momentum and capture the booming Chinese mobile market."
Apple had been No. 2 in the 2012 study of brand value, and Google was No. 4. IBM, previously No. 3, slipped to fourth place, and Microsoft stayed level at fifth place.
Samsung, which has gained prominence through consumer electronics and Android phones, rose from ninth to eight place with a 20 percent brand value in increase. That let it trade positions with Intel, which dropped 5 percent from the 2012 list.
Interbrand also calls out the companies whose brand value is rising fastest. There, Facebook came out on top, with a 43 percent increase in brand value over the last year. It ranks 52 on the overall 2013 list, up from 69th place in 2012.
Facebook's ascent stemmed from its growth in users, including mobile users and people in Asia, and financial results that bested Wall Street's expectations. "Facebook's growth is likely to continue for years to come," Interbrand's report said.
Google was the No. 2 rising brand as well. "Due to evolutionary changes to its core offerings (Search, Android, and Gmail) and new innovations like Google Glass and its self-driving car, Google's brand value increased by 34 percent," Interbrand said.
Next among top risers were Italian fashion company Prada, with a 30 percent increase; Apple, at 28 percent; and Amazon, which rose 27 percent to take 19th place on the list. Its strength stemmed not just from its e-commerce stronghold, but also from its Kindle readers, streaming video service, and original programming.
Updated at 1:12 a.m. PT with further detail.
By Kevin Bostic
Those two factors combined, Kantar's figures show, led to T-Mobile's share of smartphone sales in the U.S. market growing to 13.2 percent, up 1.1 percentage points from the previous period.
"When iOS first debuted on T-Mobile in mid-April, the majority of sales came from consumers upgrading from a featurephone to their first smartphone," said Kantar director Dominic Sunnebo. "However, looking at those who purchased an iPhone in the August period, 56% of those consumers came from another smartphone, including 38.5% from an Android device."
Kantar's figures align with previous reports from T-Mobile, which hailed a "gangbusters" first day of iPhone sales after launch. In the three months ending August 2013, the iPhone 5 was the top-selling smartphone at T-Mobile, with 17.1 percent of sales. The launch of the iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c on that network may extend Apple's share even further.
Kantar's other report focused more generally on market share, finding that the iPhone held 39.3 percent of smartphone sales in the United States market for the three months ending August 2013. This figure, too, was even before the record breaking launch of the iPhone 5s and 5c in September. Kantar believes Apple's share will almost certainly spike in its next examination of the market.
In Japan, Apple is just ahead of the Android platform, with Apple holding a 48.6 percent share to Android's 47.4. Apple could open up a wide lead, though, thanks to the iPhone's arrival on NTT DoCoMo, the country's largest carrier.
Kantar's report also looked at the fortunes of other smartphone platforms, finding that Microsoft's Windows Phone platform is approaching a double-digit market share across the five major European markets. In Germany, Windows Phone is within one percentage point of iOS. Microsoft's growth in this arena is fueled in large part by Nokia's low-end Lumia handsets, which are popular among 16 to 24 year-olds and 35 to 49 year-olds.
Troubled Canadian manufacturer BlackBerry remains in a tailspin, according to Kantar's figures. The erstwhile leader in mobile productivity now stands at a 1.8 percent share in the United States and a 2.4 percent share across the major European markets.
Apple's (AAPL) spaceship looks as if it's finally getting ready to land.
After years of planning what promises to be Silicon Valley's most iconic landmark, Apple this week enters the final stretch in its plan to open its new saucer-shaped headquarters in Cupertino. On Tuesday afternoon, the company and city officials will hold a public discussion that could help determine the building's fate, allowing political leaders and the public to weigh in on the completed environmental impact study and learn how Apple intends to address concerns that have been raised.
"The good news is that the EIR appears to have been very comprehensive, with every impact listed along with what Apple is doing to mitigate those impacts," Mayor Orrin Mahoney said Monday. "We've all received tons of emails about this project, and most have been positive. When I talk to neighbors and friends they say, 'How come they haven't started building it yet?'"
The building project, which Mahoney says is now rivaled only by One World Trade Center in New York City in terms of scope and size, is designed by world-famous architect Sir Norman Foster. With its four stories and 2.8 million square feet expected to house up to 14,200 employees, the architectural extravaganza is sure to draw tourists from around the world, planting Silicon Valley firmly on the map of ultracool corporate addresses.
If the plan is approved by the planning commission, which meets on Wednesday, and by the City Council, which takes an initial vote Oct. 15 and a final vote Nov. 19, city officials say demolition of a former Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) campus on the site could be underway by year's end.
While both the commission and council seem almost certain to give the project a green light, some supporters are taking no chances. Jim Reed with the Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce said his group has asked its members to attend Tuesday's meeting to show support for Apple's ambitious plans.
"People need to speak up on behalf of this project," he said. "You'd think, Who wouldn't want a marquee building like this in their town? But you can't assume anything. So we'll be there to support Apple, because this project is important not just for Cupertino but for all of Silicon Valley and the region's overall economy."
Mahoney says much of Tuesday's workshop will be devoted to concerns the community has raised over the project's potential impact on traffic patterns, especially during the morning commute, when the neighborhood's roadways already are heavily congested. He says that while extra lanes are planned for the Wolfe Road exit in both directions, there is a limit to how much any developer can do to satisfy everyone.
"No matter how much some people might want it, Apple simply can't add another lane to Interstate 280," said the mayor. "It's physically impossible."
Mahoney said a detailed model of the headquarters will be unveiled to the public in the coming weeks, showing how expansive and impressive Foster's strange-looking creation really is. Amenities include three restaurants, totaling 120,000 square feet, along with a corporate auditorium of 120,000 square feet, fitness centers and a large testing-and-data center.
Some design details may be discussed at Tuesday's workshops, although officials say much of the meeting will deal with traffic, including a presentation by Apple's consultants, Fehr & Peers.
"I'm not sure how long the workshop will go on," city spokesman Rick Kitson said. "But since this is the biggest project in Cupertino's history, it could take some time."
Contact Patrick May at 408-920-5689 or follow him at Twitter.com/patmaymerc.
Source: San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber
The latest edition of an influential annual report sees technology companies further staking their claim to some of the world's most important brands. Interbrand now names Apple as the most valuable brand in the world, with Google in second place; Coca-Cola, which took the top spot in all 13 previous reports, must settle for third. IBM and Microsoft round out the top five, and Samsung switched places with Intel to come in eighth. Facebook is the biggest riser in 2013, jumping to 52nd place from last year's 69th.
"Tech brands continue to dominate Interbrand's Best Global Brands report," the consultancy firm said in a press release, "underscoring the fundamental and invaluable role they play in consumers' lives."
The report is based on a number of factors including financial performance, customer loyalty, and the role each brand plays in a purchasing decision. Through this, Interbrand issues a valuation of each brand: Apple's is $98.3 billion, Google's $93.3 billion, and Coca-Cola's $79.2 billion. Certain major brands that might have been expected to make an appearance don't match Interbrand's criteria — the BBC doesn't issue enough financial information to analyze, for example, and brands such as those owned by Walmart and telecoms companies don't have enough global reach.
"Few brands have enabled so many people to do so much so easily, which is why Apple has legions of adoring fans, as evidenced by the record-breaking launch of the iPhone 5C and 5S," says the report. "For revolutionizing the way we work, play, and communicate — and for mastering the ability to surprise and delight — Apple has set a high bar for aesthetics, simplicity, and ease of use that all other tech brands are now expected to match, and that Apple itself is expected to continually exceed."
Ashley Brown, Coca-Cola's group director for digital communications and social media, addressed Apple and Google's success with magnanimity on Twitter.
Congrats #Apple and #Google. Nothing lasts forever, and it's nice to be in such stellar company http://t.co/dDfDdpFI4p #1brand
— Ashley Brown (@iamashbrown) September 30, 2013
Although technology companies dominate the top 10 with six spots, the rest of the list is more balanced; in fact, car companies including Toyota, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW account for the most places, with 14 out of 100 assigned to the "automotive" sector. Fast-moving consumer goods companies such as Gillette occupy 12 spaces, the same number as the technology industry. The lines are somewhat blurry, however — Amazon is classified solely as a retailer, for example, and IBM is considered a business services brand. And the report is far from universally positive for the technology industry; Nokia tumbled from 19th place to 57th, and BlackBerry fell off the list completely.
But the biggest revelation in the list is the astonishing growth in brand recognition and value shown by both Apple and Google over recent years. Coca-Cola grew just 2 percent since the 2012 list, against 34 percent for Google and 28 percent for Apple. Other technology companies in the top 10 had mixed fortunes: Microsoft has been relatively flat in the past decade, but Samsung displayed impressive growth of 20 percent to earn its eighth-place spot. Interbrand puts this down to the company's "innovative products" and a "massive" $4 billion spent on marketing — four times Apple's advertising outlay.
So there you are, at the height of apple-picking season, sitting at the kitchen table and looking at those two sacks of apples you’ve just hauled home, delusional with baking ideas and apple usage possibilities. You clearly weren’t thinking straight when you decided to bring home 40 apples.
You were never going to make those Normandise apple tarts, with the thin slices fanned out on top beneath a shiny glaze. And apple butter? Really? It’s very easy to get carried away with apple ambition after you’ve spent a day hiking around an orchard and carefully choosing which apples would be best for which deserts. But that’s okay, because nothing’s more American than ambition. Except maybe apple pie.
Let go of those cooking show pretensions. You don’t need to make the perfect crème fraîche for a topping. Who is that single mint leaf kidding? What, am I supposed to be impressed that you own a set of ramekins and can make little versions of bigger things? No, just put aside all the flash and the basic-cable-inspired baking magic you’re itching to show off.
Make the most of your bounty and do what I do: If you have a lot of apples, you make a lot of apple pies.
Now, these pies are not for you. Well, okay, keep one for yourself. The rest are meant for friends and family, neighbors, for the co-workers whose company you enjoy, or even for that boss whose company you don’t particularly enjoy but still need to keep on your side. Apple pie can do that.
Because here’s the thing: everybody loves pie – especially apple pie, the undisputed king of pies – despite blueberry’s valiant efforts. Want to impress a girl? One hour, pow! – warm apple pie. Need something quick and easy to whip up and bring to that party? Ain’t a party without pie.
Best of all – apple pies are easy as…well, you know. There’s not much to them, and even though there are a hundred variations on the theme, they’re all pretty straightforward. You need apples (3 or 4), sugar (2/3 cup), flour (2 tablespoons), eggs (1 or 2), a lemon, cinnamon, allspice, a pinch of salt, and nutmeg. That’s it.
Don’t be a showoff and try throwing some raisins into that pie, as if apples needed dry grapes to validate their awesomeness. Nobody cares about your raisins. Just let those apples be. Peel and slice them, medium-thin. Try to mix varieties – a tart Granny Smith, maybe a Rome, whose charms are revealed mostly in the oven, and a sweeter Red Delicious. Mix and match at whim.
Mix apple slices in a large bowl with flour, sugar, and spices. Zest a lemon within an inch of its life and throw that in the bowl along with all the juice you can squeeze out of it. Beat an egg (maybe two if the pie shell is deep enough) and throw that in, too. This will help hold the pie together when you slice it later, and it adds a custard-y touch to the filling. Fill the pie shell and cover with either a full crust or a lattice. I go lattice, because it tends to impress more, and also because it achieves a good crust-to-filling ratio. It’s also somewhat easier to slice strips of dough from the cutting board and weave them together than it is to get a sheet of thin dough off the counter in one piece and transfer it to the top of the pie.
Whichever your crust preference, use the tines of a fork to create a series of ridges along the edge of the crust, then beat one last egg and brush on top of the crust. Finish it off with a healthy sprinkling some large-granule sugar (I use Domino organic sugar, which is a little brown but makes the upper crust crunchy-sweet).
Bake at 415 degrees for about 30 – 35 minutes, or until golden brown. Let the pie sit for at least an hour before serving, to give it time to set.
Repeat twelve times.
(A word on crusts: I will proudly admit to using frozen pie crusts – something which crust snobs clutch at pearls over. But flour, water, eggs, maybe butter…these are simple things, and the time saved is, in my opinion, more than worth whatever supposed loss of flavor crust fans say is the tradeoff. I’ve never heard anyone describe a pie’s successes in terms of the superiority of the chosen crust. As long as it’s not soggy or burnt, sour or too crumbly, a crust is a crust. It’s a vehicle for sugar-sweetened apples to make their way to your mouth. Even the cheapest frozen-aisle crust can feel like a millionaire with the right egg and sugar glaze.)
The competition is fierce, but Lodsys might be the worst patent troll in America. Using vaguely worded early-90s patents that barely rise above gibberish, it has waged a massive campaign of lawsuits and intimidation against small application developers. Last week saw two big stories in the ongoing Lodsys saga.
The first story is that Martha Stewart’s media company has sued Lodsys in federal court in Wisconsin. How did Lodsys end up in a patent fight with Martha Stewart? Well, the troll claims that everyone who uses Apple's in-app purchase APIs infringes its patents. (In reality, the patents discuss a method for providing remote customer feedback for early 90s technology like fax machines.) So it sent Martha Stewart Living a demand for $5,000 for each of four iPad apps. Faced with such a demand, many companies pay up since it is cheaper than the cost of even the initial stages of litigation. Patent trolls rely on this strategy to rack up as many settlements as possible.
But Martha Stewart Living did not fold. Instead, it took the fight back to the patent troll, filing a declaratory judgment action in federal court in Wisconsin. (Although Lodsys pretends to operate out of the Eastern District of Texas, its CEO conducts the company’s business from Wisconsin.) We applaud Martha Stewart for standing up to Lodsys. Fighting back makes the patent troll business model more expensive and reduces trolls’ ability to use weak patents to impose a tax on productive companies.
The week’s other Lodsys story received less media attention but is probably more important. On Tuesday, a judge in the Eastern District of Texas dismissed Apple’s intervention in a case Lodsys had filed against seven app developers. Back in 2011, Apple intervened in the case to assert that its license to Lodsys’s patents protects iOS developers. After two years of litigation, the case had reached the point where this question was ready for decision. But after the individual developers in the case settled, Lodsys asked the court to dismiss Apple’s intervention as moot. Clearly, Lodsys wanted to avoid a ruling on the merits of the license issue. Understandably. If it loses, then it can no longer assert its patents against app developers.
Together with the Application Developers Alliance, EFF filed an amicus brief asking the court to decide the question now. Basic justice required the court settle the still live issue of whether Apple’s license protects the millions of iOS developers. Delay allows Lodsys to continue its massive campaign of harassment against small developers who should be shielded under the principle of patent exhaustion. Unfortunately, the judge disagreed and dismissed Apple from the case.
This is a big setback. But there is hope Apple will step back in. The court explained that its decision does not preclude Apple from intervening in other cases or from filing its own declaratory judgment action. We hope Apple acts quickly. In the meantime, we will push for patent reform that undoes the business model of bottom-feeder trolls like Lodsys.
Image: Martha Stewart is released by David Shankbone under CC BY 3.0
If you’ve somehow managed to miss every third photo in your Facebook news feed, it’s that time of year to hoist young children into trees to pick an unreasonable amount of apples to bring home and bake into things.
Depending on where you are in the country peak apple season will of course vary, but here in New York state, where the orchards have a national reputation, it’s peak harvesting time. Indeed, some varieties are past peak harvest time, as I discovered on a visit to Masker Orchards on this past Saturday, when we found most of the Jonagold section of the orchard picked clean.
New York grows great apples, and there are too many quality orchards that are variations on the pick-your-own, country store, hayride, petting zoo, apple orchard destination theme to make any definitive lists, but with some research you can narrow down a list of options according to your preferences. Are you looking for a large farm with hundreds of seasonal employees and dozens of options for things to do with the kids? Or are you looking for a quieter orchard, one where you can plop down a blanket, bring a picnic, and eat the apples straight from the trees? Or both?
I’ve chosen two of the dozen or so apple picking farms I’ve visited. Both are popular, and for good reason, but the first, Masker Orchards in Warwick, NY, is by far the busier of the two. Located 45 miles northwest of the George Washington Bridge, the drive can take anywhere from just over an hour to almost three, depending on traffic and the day you visit.
At more than 200 acres, Masker’s is big enough to accommodate an almost constant influx of cars, and they keep coming well into the afternoon, so if you want to see what all the commotion is about, make a point of arriving at the 9 am opening time. You’ll have a lot of competition, even that early. Families pile the kids into their SUVs and minivans, and many have favorite picnic spots that they’ve used for years. There are huge lunchtime barbecues, tables, even collapsible canopies. It’s a very festive atmosphere, and the farm is well-equipped to handle the volume of visitors, even though lines in front of the concession stand and for the pony rides can get long. Make sure you check their ripening schedule before heading out for the day so you’ll know which areas of the orchard to look for when you arrive. Parking and admission are free, and the farm welcomes you to eat their apples straight off the trees – you’re only charged for each bag of apples you drive off with ($26 buys you about 20 lbs. of apples).
And while there’s something undeniably fun in the energy from the hundreds of families Masker’s attracts on a weekend day, it also makes for long lines to the bathroom, an increased likelihood of screaming babies within earshot, most frustratingly, a slow crawl through the orchard’s lanes, which are almost constantly clogged with children and others.
F
or something a little more laid back, Wright’s Farm in Gardiner, NY, puts the focus on the apples and the country store. As with Masker’s, you’re allowed to drive your car right into the orchard, park, picnic, and barbecue. Located 70 miles northwest of the George Washington Bridge (about an hour and a half’s drive on a good day), and approximately 453 acres big, Wright’s Farm is more than twice the size of Masker’s, allowing visitors to feel at times as if they have a corner of the orchard all to themselves. Parking is free, and admission is $10 for adults, $5 for kids 4-9. Bags are provided with the admission price, and the adult size holds about 20 apples. Check the calendar here for peak ripening times.
Wright’s also has a fantastic country store stocked with a small variety of the other fruits and veggies they grow, and a selection of farm-made jams and jellies. We brought home a jar each of japapeño peach and nectarine last year, and both were delicious. And be careful – they’ll get you at the checkout with their varieties of homemade fudge, also. In their defense, it’s hard to say no to pumpkin fudge. Goes down amazingly well with their own fresh-squeezed cider.
Others have compiled lists of their favorite New York apple orchards, and they each have different things to recommend them. As long as you’re open to the idea that the trip may take an hour or two longer than planned because of the traffic, any of them would be a great way to spend a day picking apples, picnicking, and planning all the different things you’d like to make (but probably won’t) from the day’s apple bounty: turnovers, pies, tarts, roasted apples, caramel apples – no matter what you decide to cook with your apples, your kitchen is pretty much guaranteed to smell awesome the following day.
Google announced its plans earlier this year, but has now launched its first Web Designer Beta, to "create engaging, interactive HTML5-based designs and motion graphics that can run on any device."
The tool is designed primarily to create advertising "through any platform" the company notes, naming its own DoubleClick Studio and AdMob ad networks, but also providing a "generic option to push content through any other ad network."
The company specifically highlights the new tool's web standards as working on "any screen," noting "it doesnt matter how brilliant your work is if people cant see it. Now everything you create is accessible on any screen desktop, tablet or mobile without compatibility issues."The fate of Flash on Android turned out to be very similar to the fate of WebM and NFC.
That's a clear allusion to Google's previous efforts to push Adobe Flash as a desktop medium for web ads into the mobile space. The company wasted years in a failed attempt to port Flash to Android as a differentiating feature, and spent lots of resources promoting the idea that iOS was lacking support for Flash playback, before being forced to acknowledge that without iOS, there was no market.
Android ended up with experimental Flash support that never worked on most devices, and didn't last for more than a single Android dessert name before it was terminated with the release of Jelly Bean two years ago. The fate of Flash on Android turned out to be very similar to the fate of WebM and NFC.
Apple addressed the primary potential use cases of Flash on iOS initially by working with video producers (including Google's YouTube) to support standard H.264 video for mobile playback, rather than continuing to use the proprietary codecs and wrapping of Flash Videos that had become a de facto standard on the web.
The company next began targeting interactivity and ads with initiatives and tools designed to replace Flash with open web standards: HTML5, JavaScript and CSS. However, by that time Google had shifted from a key Apple partner to a combative opponent.
After relaunching Android 2.0 as an iPhone clone, Google tried to block Apple from entering the mobile ad market by paying an astronomical $750 million to acquire AdMob, then in talks with Apple, which subsequently paid just $275 million to buy Quattro Wireless instead.
The next year, as Google turned its back on open source and web standards by making Android 3.0 closed source and throwing its support behind Flash rather than HTML5 and H.264, Apple's Steve Jobs outlined plans for iAd in iOS 4, designed to fix the problems in mobile advertising by making ads interactive and unobtrusive, and built using web standards.
By the end of the year, Apple released iAd Producer as a development tool for creating iAd content, as AppleInsider had projected that summer.
Since then, Apple has added support for building other web-standards content to iAd Producer, this spring launching version 4.0 supporting development of interactive iBooks Author widgets, iTunes LP liner notes and iTunes Extra DVD-like bonus content for movies.
A report by eMarketer in June projected revenue growth for Apple's iAd to reach $213 million this year, increasing to $376 million in 2014 and $623 million in the following year, a compounded annual growth rate of 71.3 percent.
Earlier this month, a report by Ad Age noted that Apple lined up major advertisers for its iTunes Radio launch, including McDonald's, Nissan, Pepsi and Procter & Gamble.
These top brands "paid upwards of $10 million to be exclusive iTunes Radio advertisers within their respective industries through the end of 2013," the magazine reported, adding that Apple is also "readying iTunes Radio -- and its new ad products -- for its wide launch to advertisers at the start of 2014."
Over the last couple of years, Apple has been either the first or the second most valuable brand in the world, depending who you believe.
Now, we can chalk one up for the first camp: According to Interbrand's 2013 global brand rankings, Apple has overtaken Coca Cola to become the world's most valuable brand, with its value estimated at a whopping $98.3 billion.
Apple's rise through the rankings has truly been meteoric: In 2011, the company sat at eight place with an estimated $33 billion brand value.
Google has also leaped past Coca Cola this year, and it now sits in second place, with its brand value estimated at $93.3 billion. It's followed by Coca Cola with $79.2 billion, IBM with $78.8 billion and Microsoft with $59.5 billion. General Electric, McDonald's, Samsung, Intel and Toyota round up the top 10. Amazon and Facebook, which are placed 19th and 52nd, have been labeled "top risers," having risen by 27% and 43%, respectively, since last year.
Do you agree with Interbrand's list? Do you consider Apple to be the most valuable brand in the world? Share your thoughts in the comments.
Image: Justin Sullivan/Getty, Interbrand
What could today's meeting with activist investor Carl Icahn and Apple's CEO Tim Cook mean for your portfolio? Timothy Lesko, Granite Investment Advisors, provides insight.
Some Apple shareholders are hoping Icahn will get his way.
"I can't say there is a dollar figure we want him to press for," said Timothy Lesko of Granite Investment Advisors, which has owned Apple shares for over a decade. "We would like to see them increase the payout ratio. Right now, it's at about a 27 percent payout to shareholders, and perhaps they can move up to a maybe 30 to 40 percent payout to shareholders."
While Lesko said he is happy to see Apple, under Cook's leadership, dramatically increase its payout to shareholders, there is still room for even more value to be returned.
"As we continue to see Apple deliver on its promise furthering out the iOS infrastructure and developing new products, we would just like to see it consistently increase the amount back to shareholders," Lesko said on CNBC's "Squawk on the Street."
"If they are going to generate $30 billion in free cash flow, it would just be nice to see, on a sequential basis, them to continue to give that back to shareholders."
—By CNBC's Cadie Thompson. Follow her on Twitter @CadieThompson .
Don't trust the postal service to handle the delivery of your new iPhone 5s? Fear not: Apple's in-store pick-up option has returned this week, if only in limited capacity.
Depending on your choice of size, color, and carrier, the new flagship device is available for pick up in various stores, including New York's Grand Central, Fifth Avenue, and SoHo locations.
The Personal Pickup program allows consumers to make a purchase online, then visit the chosen store to pick up the device (or have someone else go in your place). Skip the lines and leave your Apple Store with iPhone in hand, ready to start placing calls and taking photos. With Personal Setup, a store employee will also get the device up and running before you leave the store.
Options are limited. A silver 64GB iPhone 5s from Verizon, for example, is available today from the SoHo, 14th St., and Grand Central Apple Stores. But the same device for AT&T is listed as "unavailable for pickup." A 32GB space gray iPhone 5s from Sprint was also available from most stores in Manhattan, but the same smartphone from Verizon was nowhere to be found. Visit Apple's website to see if your desired iPhone is in stock anywhere near you.
One option that is hard to come by in any version or carrier is the gold iPhone 5s. There is still a waiting period for online orders, but those who want it now can always shell out the big bucks on eBay.
Cupertino boasted a record-setting launch weekend, selling more than 9 million new iPhones (both the 5s and 5c) in its first three days. With such success, Apple was forced to drop the in-store pick-up option from its site amidst dwindling supplies.
According to the Apple website, the iPhone 5s is still set to ship in October, which is just one day away. However, those who bought the 5s on launch date were reporting that their estimated arrival dates were in late October. It appears that the multi-colored iPhone 5c is readily available online and in stores.
Meanwhile, Virgin Mobile USA last week announced plans to carry Apple's new smartphones without a contract, beginning Oct. 1. Pricing has not yet been revealed; unlimited data and messaging plans start from $35 per month, with a $5 monthly discount for buyers who register for automatic payments. The Sprint-owned wireless carrier's "unlimited" data throttles after 2.5GB.
For more, see PCMag's reviews of the Apple iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c, as well as the slideshow above.
It’s been another dark month for America’s troubled patent system. The latest news relates to Lodsys, the shell company which claims to own “in-app purchasing,” and which has been putting the screws to app makers for a share of their revenue.
Lodsys has already sued or threatened hundreds (and likely thousands) of app makers. The situation is serious enough that Apple, warning that 6 million iOS developers are at risk, asked a Texas judge in 2011 to let it participate in a trial where Lodsys is suing the app makers.
Apple says it can join in because it already bought a license for the same patents from Intellectual Ventures, the mother-troll that gave the patents to Lodsys. In Apple’s view, its license should shield the small app developers.
Unfortunately, Apple has just been booted out of court. As Ars Technica explains, the federal judge overseeing the Texas case ruled that Apple’s motion only applies to seven specific app maker defendants — and Lodsys has just reached settlements with all seven.
The ruling amounts to a technicality since other iOS developers are still in Lodsys’s cross-hairs in the very same case — and the question of whether Apple’s license protects app developers is still a live issue.
So what happened? Why did the judge refuse to even hear Apple? The outcome is likely tied to the fact that the case was taking place in the federal district for Eastern Texas — a cluster of small towns that turned patent trolling into a major cottage industry, welcoming lawyers from across the country to sue app developers and everyone else.
The upshot, as Ars notes, is that Lodsys can continue its rampage as Apple tries to get its foot back in the door. Meanwhile, the app developers best hope for now may be Martha Stewart — who became annoyed by Lodsys and last week sued to crush its patents in Wisconsin.
Apple may have to rely on arch-rival Samsung for a hefty percentage of processors to power the next iPhone.
Samsung has been Apple's go-to manufacturer for the past several chip generations, most recently producing the A5, the A6, and this year's A7. Apple has sought to reduce that dependence by reportedly cutting a deal with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) to take on production of future A series processors. But Samsung is far from out of the picture, according to a story from The Korea Economic Daily.
Samsung will manufacture 30 to 40 percent of the A8 processors needed by Apple next year, leaving TSMC to kick in the rest, claims the Korean news site. Apple reportedly wanted TSMC as its only A8 supplier. But creating enough quantity of the 20-nanometer chip is a difficult process, forcing Apple to keep working with Samsung.
Apple has been looking to cut ties with Samsung for some time. Given the high demand for the iPhone and iPad, Apple continually needs to reduce its reliance on a single supplier. But Apple's quest to divorce itself from Samsung is largely due to the legal bad blood between the two companies, say analysts.
(Via Engadget)
CUPERTINO, Calif. — Welcome to Appletown, USA.
Apple's phenomenal success and expansion into buildings across this city over the last decade have already made it hard to know where Cupertino ends and the company begins. But just wait.
By the time Apple plops a campus the size of the Pentagon into this city of 60,000 people, Cupertino, Calif., will be more economically dependent on one company than any other Silicon Valley town.
Two years after the project was announced, as the details have come into sharper focus, it's almost impossible to overestimate the effect Apple Campus 2 will have on Cupertino. Apple envisions the 176-acre campus as its own Fortress of Solitude that will cut off northeast Cupertino from the public.
This week, the city begins a series of hearings to grant final approval for the project. The hearings, and a development agreement under negotiation, represent the city's best chance to set the terms of its relationship with the company for decades to come. Although Apple is eager to move forward on a project already behind schedule, the city must consider what concessions it wants before tying its economic fate so closely to a single company.
"In a high-tech area, even the most powerful companies disappear surprisingly quickly and employment can scale down much quicker than it scales up," said Jerry Davis, a professor at University of Michigan's Ross School of Business. "There is definitely risk."
Big numbers
When the new campus is built — sometime in 2016 — Apple will cast a larger economic shadow over Cupertino than even Internet search giant Google does in nearby Mountain View.
The numbers contained in a recent economic impact report commissioned by Apple tell the story:
• Apple's 16,000 employees in Cupertino make up 40% of the city's jobs. When the new campus opens in 2016, Apple projects 24,000 Cupertino-based employees.
• Apple paid $9.2 million in tax revenue to the city in the last fiscal year, about 18% of the city's budget. Apple predicts that will grow to $13 million.
• Apple currently accounts for 9.6% of Cupertino's property tax valuation, up from 1.21% in 2001. The new campus will triple its valuation.
Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy in Palo Alto, says there is little risk of Cupertino being too dependent on Apple. After all, this is Silicon Valley, where onetime giants fall and are replaced by hot young start-ups.
"I doubt that Apple will all of the sudden move their design headquarters to Nashville," Levy said.
Still, the company seems more vulnerable than it did two years ago when the project was first proposed. Its stock has fallen about 30% in the last year as growth has slowed.
"Six months ago, I would have said if we were going to rely on one company, this would be the company to rely on," said Cupertino Mayor Orrin Mahoney, a former Hewlett-Packard employee. "But things change fast in this business."
Prestigious address
Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, who grew up in nearby Los Altos and went to high school in Cupertino, originally didn't even want to put his company here.
In the 1970s, a feed and grain mill hinted at the town's rural roots. Apricot orchards flowered alongside young computer companies.
Jobs yearned for the cachet of Stanford University, which helped give rise to HP. He rented a post office box in Palo Alto to lend Apple more prestige, recalled early Apple employee Daniel Kottke, and he scouted Los Altos for a headquarters with "a higher-class address." Unable to find anything, Jobs settled on Cupertino.
After years of leasing office space, Apple completed a new headquarters at 1 Infinite Loop in 1993. By then, Cupertino was being transformed into the suburban model of strip malls, office parks and concrete that sprawl across Silicon Valley.
Over the last decade, Apple has outgrown its Infinite Loop address, which has 3,000 employees stuffed into 856,000 square feet. The company purchased or leased an additional 2 million square feet of space in the Cupertino area for 13,000 more employees, including 76 acres adjacent to the old HP campus.
Along the way, Apple put Cupertino on the map.
"We felt proud of ourselves getting some fame for our tiny part of the world," Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak said. "Apple became hugely successful and so valuable, and we were the shining star of Cupertino."
Beyond the glamour of being associated with Apple, Cupertino has reaped big economic benefits, such as the $4.6 billion that Apple says the company spends each year at local Silicon Valley businesses. There are smaller intangibles, such as Apple employees who volunteer in schools.
But it's only in the last decade that Apple has become the city's dominant economic force. That's the result of Apple's growth and a decision by HP, once the city's largest employer, to abandon its Cupertino campus.
After the departure of HP, city officials believed it was essential that Cupertino attract a wider range of companies so it didn't rely too heavily on one employer.
"The recessions and the departure of a major company, Hewlett-Packard, demonstrates the need for diversification of the city's revenue base," reads Cupertino's 2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
That year, Jobs presented a plan to do the opposite.
Resisting change
Cupertino still suffers from the rap that it's less a city than a crossroads, in part because it has no historic downtown to give it a firm identity.
Now, Apple's campus may become the city's defining landmark. After accumulating 76 acres in east Cupertino, Apple bought the adjacent 100 acres to the north from HP.
Apple's decision to build a new headquarters here has been greeted mostly with hometown, boosterish pride among businesses and residents, though there are small but noticeable rumblings about increased traffic, restricted access to this corner of town and the company's outsized influence.
The element generating the most heat, however, is Apple's request to unite these two chunks of land.
Apple wants to buy and close the road between them, Pruneridge Avenue. That request has upset some residents because the tree-lined sidewalks around the old HP campus are a popular walkway.
"I hear Apple wants to convert Pruneridge Ave between Wolf and Tantau from public to private space?" wrote Kao Lee in an email to the city. "I and many other people use it as part of a jogging/walking loop around the old HP campus."
Apple must tear down 26 existing buildings, totaling 2.65 million square feet of space, before beginning construction on what would eventually be replaced with the new 2.8-million-square-foot campus. When done, the new campus will accommodate as many as 14,200 employees, up from about 10,000 previously working on the old HP campus.
Although Apple needs the new campus for its ballooning workforce, its other official objective, according to planning documents, is to "Achieve the security and privacy required for the invention of new products by eliminating any public access through the site, and protecting the perimeters against trespassers."
The public can drive around the road that circles Apple's current headquarters, two miles to the west at 1 Infinite Loop, putting them within a few feet of Apple's offices, sacred geek territory.
The new headquarters building will be set far off the road, just as HP's old offices were. And Apple plans to increase the number of trees on the land 50%, making the offices even harder for prying eyes to spot.
How important is security on the new site? In one email exchange with city staff, an Apple executive haggled over the location of a single tree.
"Also, if we move the tree an additional 5 feet in, the tree becomes a security issue for us," Apple executive Meg Thomas wrote. "People will be able to potentially climb the tree and hop the fence."
Roger Martin has lived one block from the site in neighboring Sunnyvale for two decades. He'll be able to see the new campus from his second-story bedroom.
"They keep talking about how beautiful the Apple campus is going to be, but I am not an Apple employee," Martin said.
Martin remembers the noise and commotion caused when HP built some offices. He's worried about a flood of new cars racing through his neighborhood.
Tax rebates
On Tuesday, Cupertino begins the final stages for approving the campus with a joint hearing between the City Council and the Planning Commission. Instead of at the town hall, the meeting is being held at a nearby community center to accommodate the large crowd expected.
The City Council is then expected to formally vote to approve the plan Oct. 15. As the city and Apple continue to negotiate terms of the development agreement, Cupertino must decide what changes and financial terms it wants to request.
For instance, Apple currently has a deal with Cupertino to get a refund of half the sales taxes the city receives from the company.
Last year, according to Apple's report, the city received $12.69 million in sales tax generated by Apple. Cupertino refunded about $6.4 million to Apple.
Apple wants to renew the deal. The report projects annual taxes to the city would still grow by $4 million if the tax deal were in place.
But what if Apple fails to meet its growth projections?
In an email to city staff in December, Cupertino City Manager David Brandt discussed a minimum tax payment for Apple, in case growth projections don't pan out.
Meanwhile, the campus planning process has strained Cupertino's resources. At a community meeting this summer to discuss the environmental impact report, the city had 50 of 160 staff members on hand to handle the crowd and logistics.
Just reviewing the project has threatened to overwhelm the city's planning department to such an extent that officials proposed creating an Apple Situation Room at City Hall for staff and documents.
The city asked whether Apple could lend them a laptop because the planning department had only one, which it shared among employees. The city's planning director also inquired whether Apple would buy them a Smart board.
Timm Borden, Cupertino's director of public works, wrote in an email to an Apple executive: "It is certainly not routine business, it is most of our business, and we want to be proud to facilitate this once-in-a-lifetime project and meet your permit processing needs."
Apple has brought back its personal pickup service for buyers of the iPhone 5S.
Through in-store pickup, you can purchase the 5S through Apple's online store or through the Apple Store mobile app. Once the phone is available, you'll receive an e-mail saying it's ready to be picked up at the Apple Store location you selected.
The iPhone 5S was available for in-store pickup when it initially launched, but Apple removed the option a day later. The 5S is in short supply, with Apple's online store listing an estimated ship date of sometime in October.
The Personal Pickup option showed the phone as unavailable at most of the stores I checked in and around the New York City area. Only Apple's flagship store at Fifth Avenue and another store on the Manhattan's Upper West Side indicated the 5S as available for pickup. A search of other major cities also revealed very sporadic availability.
Apple has emerged as the most valuable brand in the world, passing Coca-Cola which held the top position for 13 years, according to a report released by brand consultancy Interbrand.
The maker of high-profile products like the iPad and iPhone, which was ranked second last year, saw its brand value grow 28 percent this year to US$98.3 billion. Other tech companies that figured in the top five rankings for 2013 were Google at number two and IBM and Microsoft at fourth and fifth place, respectively. Google was number four in 2012, while IBM was third and Microsoft held the fifth position last year.
"Few brands have enabled so many people to do so much so easily, which is why Apple has legions of adoring fans," Interbrand said in the report released Monday. Apple has set a high bar for aesthetics, simplicity and ease of use that other tech brands have to match, and Apple itself will have to continually exceed, the report said.
Competitor Samsung Electronics, at number eight, saw its brand value go up 20 percent to $39.6 billion, as the brand continues to strengthen its position globally, spending more than $4 billion in marketing last year, and launching innovative products such as the Galaxy S4 and Galaxy Note II, according to the Interbrand report.
The challenge for Apple is to slow "Samsung's momentum and capture the booming Chinese mobile market." As significantly, the world is awaiting another innovative product from Apple, which could be perhaps the iWatch wearable computer or something completely unexpected, Interbrand said. The company's reputation has, meanwhile, taken some hits after it was found guilty of conspiring with five large book publishers to fix e-book prices, and faced allegations about worker conditions in China at its supplier Foxconn, and ongoing patent disputes with Samsung.
The going is getting tougher for Apple, which reported that revenue was flat at about $35.3 billion in its fiscal third quarter ended June 29, while net profit dipped to $6.9 billion from $8.8 billion in the same quarter last year. Its smartphone market share dropped in the second quarter to its lowest level in three years of 13.6 percent compared to Samsung's over 33 percent, according to research firm Strategy Analytics. Apple was, however, ahead of Samsung in tablets in the second quarter of 2013, with a 32 percent share of the market to Samsung's 18 percent, according to IDC.
Interbrand's rankings, first introduced in 2000, covers global brands that have at least 30 percent of their revenues from outside the brand's home region. The brands must also have a presence in at least three major continents, and broad geographic coverage in emerging markets. Brands are rated on the financial performance of the branded products or services, the role they play in influencing customer choice, and ability of the brand to command a premium price or secure earnings for the company, Interbrand said in a statement.
John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address is john_ribeiro@idg.com
Now, after two years of litigation, it's back to square one. The East Texas judge overseeing Lodsys' systematic patent attack on app developers has refused to even consider Apple's motion. Instead, he allowed the patent-holding company to settle all its cases—and then dismissed Apple's motion as moot. By doing so, US District Judge Rodney Gilstrap—who has inherited the patent-happy East Texas court that once belonged to patent-troll favorite T. John Ward—has enabled Lodsys to threaten developers for months, and perhaps even years, to come.
At that point, Lodsys also targeted Android developers with patent infringement claims, and Apple eventually filed a motion to intervene within the Lodsys lawsuits. While Apple was granted limited permission in April 2012 to intervene in the Lodsys case, this permission was overturned today.
This past April, Lodsys specifically targeted Disney’s “Where’s My Water?” title among others in a new round of lawsuits over in-app purchasing, stating that Disney had infringed its ’565 and ‘078 patents had been infringed upon by the entertainment corporation. However, Lodsys agreed last month to dismiss a patent case against developer Todd More, for a charitable donation. Overall, Apple has been the number one target for patent trolls with 171 cases in five years, with U.S. President Barack Obama targeting patent trolls such as Lodsys, announcing proposed legislative changes this past June.
With the amount now being charged for IAP's these day, I think Lodsys are not the only trolls under the bridge.
I have no sympathy for the Dev's who are actually charging for an App then getting kids [and adult's] to pay up to £60+ for useless gem packs and upgrades etc.
At least if an App is free, I know not to bother downloading it as it will invariably be full of adverts and IAP con-tricks.
It has all become like those awful UK holiday resort chains (you know who they are), who get kids to pump arcade machines with money to obtain tokens, who's prize value is a fraction of the money you paid.
So if the Dev's are abusing the system [making huge amounts of money from it] and ruining the spirit of the original idea, what is so different to what Lodsys is doing?
They can all burn in patent hell.
The whole system is one giant waste of time. Intellectual property doesn't exist. You can't own something that you can't define with objective criteria. Inventing something shouldn't require a slew of lawyers. All that does is make people less productive. Don't want somebody selling "your" product that you invented? Lock in your customers with long-term contracts with escalators. Be creative. Making a law to entitle people to something that doesn't exist is the most backwards idea I've ever heard.
Lodsys are claiming they have some unique process when almost every application on any platform has an update button, it's not a huge leap of anyones imagination to link in purchases and extras.
This patent is not even helping innovation, there is no alternative to in-app purchases.
Patents need an overhaul ASAP.
Also i disagree that the developers need to be licensed to sell in app when apple owns the ecosystem and are licensed to do so. Lodsys are just trying to extort money from apple.
The developers were given the option by apple to have in-app merc not the other way round. Apple are culpable for it's use. Developers will settle and claim off apple anyway but it involves laywers who are going to suck everyone dry for no reason.
If I were a developer I would refer lodsys to apple as they control the developer ecosystem and that if lodsys wanted to settle with myself as a developer that they would need to be able to handle getting all the money needed to settle a license back from apple before paying out anything.
"claiming that it had a patent to the process"
The "patent" link goes to an error page.
----------
Here's one of their patents. Seems like an extremely vague blanket patent: http://www.google.com/patents/US5999908
Don't know why MR posted a link.
IAP which target children and include 'pay to win' options are horrible and shouldn't be encouraged. They're wrong, plain and simple.
But IAP can be beneficial to consumers and developers. Listen to the 'Real World Price Dynamics (http://developingperspective.com/2013/09/27/app-store-pricing/)' podcast with Lauren Smith or read Marco Arment's thoughts on it (http://www.marco.org/2013/09/28/underscore-price-dynamics).
I'm happy to pay up front and you may be too, but it seems that we're not representative of the majority of app purchasers. These articles suggest the majority of consumers want free apps and once there's a perception of value, they'll purchase extra functionality.
In app purchases have a place. The fact that big hitters are getting behind them may just mean trolls like Lodsys will be forced to disappear. Disney and EA, for example, are two companies using IAP with deep pockets who will fight them.
In App purchases have gone from a reasonable supplementary revenue stream for developers, to an abomination.
With the amount now being charged for IAP's these day, I think Lodsys are not the only trolls under the bridge.
I have no sympathy for the Dev's who are actually charging for an App then getting kids [and adult's] to pay up to £60+ for useless gem packs and upgrades etc.
At least if an App is free, I know not to bother downloading it as it will invariably be full of adverts and IAP con-tricks.
It has all become like those awful UK holiday resort chains (you know who they are), who get kids to pump arcade machines with money to obtain tokens, who's prize value is a fraction of the money you paid.
So if the Dev's are abusing the system [making huge amounts of money from it] and ruining the spirit of the original idea, what is so different to what Lodsys is doing?
They can all burn in patent hell.
I love how people argue that without patents, nobody would invent anything. Because nobody ever invented anything before patent offices started sprouting up, right?
The whole system is one giant waste of time. Intellectual property doesn't exist. You can't own something that you can't define with objective criteria. Inventing something shouldn't require a slew of lawyers. All that does is make people less productive. Don't want somebody selling "your" product that you invented? Lock in your customers with long-term contracts with escalators. Be creative. Making a law to entitle people to something that doesn't exist is the most backwards idea I've ever heard.
CAD BLOCKS & Drawings Download Center 【Architecture Decorative Elements CAD Collections 】 【108 World Best Architectur...