Reply
Thread Tools
Texrat's Avatar
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#111
Originally Posted by OrangeBox View Post
"Qole explained it all with his battery example. Done."

So why are you here then?
Odd... I was about to ask you that!
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 
noobmonkey's Avatar
Posts: 3,203 | Thanked: 1,391 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ Worthing, England
#112
Originally Posted by verhagke View Post
lol,

Simple economics. The fair price is what the market will bear.

And, what about fm receiver & transmitter, bluetooth, gps, accelerometers? Add those into your $500 laptop, and the price won't seem so bad.
Come to the UK and try £500 .... - even less fair - and i heard in russia it was even more, nearing £750+ i think? (That's a lot of $$$'s!)
 
Posts: 50 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#113
Originally Posted by OrangeBox View Post
"nokia embraced Java for years already, even before model 3100 . . this post has point out your inaccuracy"

Untrue. Read how to learn. I said embrace it MORE. I never said that Nokia didn't embrace java.

"i should tell you, java sucks."

That makes you an expert in Java and related technologies.

" it's also lacking the integration to the device"

So is it Java's fault? I didn't know that Java was responsible to integrate to devices.

You don't know what you're talking about.
pardon me if i'm wrong. what about moore's law and market cap as the fact? that still prove you wrong. dont get away with that
the point is how to get a longer battery life in mobile devices. running a vm and get the vm run the bytecode rather than let the machine run the native code? I dont need your argument to justify this. if nokia really embrace it in their devices years ago, the would go bankrupt because people were shouting how bad their devices and battery perform.

please, you're not speaking in the context
 
Posts: 50 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#114
no Texrat. we were drifted into talking lame here. hahah.
 
Banned | Posts: 291 | Thanked: 42 times | Joined on Dec 2009
#115
"what about moore's law and market cap as the fact? that still prove you wrong. dont get away with that"

Are you really questioning the conventional thinking of 99% economists that a bigger company has a bigger market cap? It is fact. Do your research.

Wrto Moore's law: yes, more transistor means more speed. Simple as that ever since the multicore architecture came about.
 
Posts: 50 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#116
Originally Posted by OrangeBox View Post
"what about moore's law and market cap as the fact? that still prove you wrong. dont get away with that"

Are you really questioning the conventional thinking of 99% economists that a bigger company has a bigger market cap? It is fact. Do your research.

Wrto Moore's law: yes, more transistor means more speed. Simple as that ever since the multicore architecture came about.
can you cite where do you get the "conventional thinking of 99% economists"?
clever. hheheh.
 
Banned | Posts: 291 | Thanked: 42 times | Joined on Dec 2009
#117
"can you cite where do you get the "conventional thinking of 99% economists"?"

Sure, here you go:
"Market capitalization/capitalisation (often market cap) is a measurement of the size of a business enterprise (corporation)"

Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_capitalization

"The total dollar market value of all of a company's outstanding shares. Market capitalization is calculated by multiplying a company's shares outstanding by the current market price of one share. The investment community uses this figure to determining a company's size, as opposed to sales or total asset figures."

Source: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/...talization.asp

You want more?
 
Posts: 50 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#118
wikipedia, without citation to other more reliable sources, are not reliable. and who said it's what economist have said? did it say "economists agrees that Market capitalization/capitalisation (often market cap) is a measurement of the size of a business enterprise (corporation)"?

and from investopedia: The investment community uses this figure to determining a company's size, as opposed to sales or total asset figures
THE INVESTMENT COMMUNITY. they're not economist. you call warren buffett or george soros economist? they're analyst. not economist.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to vins For This Useful Post:
Banned | Posts: 291 | Thanked: 42 times | Joined on Dec 2009
#119
Investors are people who have their money on the line. I doubt that there'd be a more reliable definition of market cap than what the investor community offers.

Anyways, your point was? Did you manage to convince yourself that my use of market cap is a "factual error"? If so, congrats. Next time I'll ask you which shares to buy or sell.

Please also, cite 2 references of your own as to where you draw your definition of market cap. That'd put the debate on equal footing. You haven't actually offered anything yet.

Check out this one as well: http://news.morningstar.com/classroo...&page=3&CN=COM

Hope you've heard about Morningstar.

Last edited by OrangeBox; 2009-12-11 at 19:48.
 
Posts: 50 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#120
i'm out. you win. hehehe.
 
Reply

Tags
ego wars, what was the topic again?, zealots unite, zealots v. zealots

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 15:22.