0
0

AAPL to $500?


 invite response                
2012 Jan 6, 6:16am   82,898 views  241 comments

by Vicente   ➕follow (1)   💰tip   ignore  

Starting my New Year with a nice bump on the AAPL I picked up last year.

Consensus on AAPL to $500? It's testing 52-week high.

« First        Comments 228 - 241 of 241        Search these comments

228   richwicks   2020 Oct 14, 11:06am  

Shaman says
Also it would be wasted only driving one car occasionally. You’d want to connect the AI to thousands of cars at once, maybe even millions! And here is where the data transfer speed comes in. It’s GOT to be snappy.


You really don't need any complicated AI if the cars are all wired up, and know the location of every other car. I'm not an expert, but i doubt we need high speed coms for it.

I also, VERY STRONGLY DISAGREE with centralization. A mouse can navigate a path at high speed. A squirrel can. I would bet the computer next to me has enough transistors, and enough storage to have something that appears to be sentience. It's probably got more storage than I do, and the neurons work at about 10,000 times the speed my own neurons do. I'm just massively parallel, but your neurons are digital as well. It's just recreating the connections of the brain and running a small portion of it at a time.

The human brain has less than 100 billion neurons. My hard disk has 10,000 billion bytes. If you can represent a neuron, with storage, with 100 bytes, yeah, my computer can simulate my thinking process.
229   mell   2020 Oct 14, 11:30am  

I think AAPL will be valuable as long as it stays a cult. Also there are some things they do make better than Samsung, like the virtual keyboard. I do think the fat years are over and AAPL will be trading range bound with maybe a slight continued uptrend if the market goes up as well. On any correction it will dump, but as long as they make money it's a safe stock, just not the best returns anymore.
230   EBGuy   2020 Oct 14, 1:50pm  

This vertical integration will never work... especially at the hardware level. Oops...
The 14-nanometer A10 Fusion iPhone 7 chip was the first Apple-designed SOC; it delivered 40% better processor performance and 50% better graphics than the one it replaced.
The 7nm A11 processor that followed unleashed a 25% performance boost in contrast to the A10.
Last year's A12 again unleashed significant performance gains over the A11.
The current A13 chips deliver 20% more performance and 40% better power efficiency than 2018’s A12.

Macs are moving to Apple silicon. Try to imagine how unfathomable that statement would have been when this thread was created in 2012. Macs transitioned to Intel processors in 2006 and in 2007 the first iPhone came out. In 2008 Apple purchased P.A.Semi and in 2010 Intrinsity. The rest is history.
It will require some sort of platform disruption to dethrone them as king of the hill. What comes after smartphones? What comes after silicon processors?
231   Patrick   2020 Oct 14, 3:45pm  

EBGuy says
What comes after smartphones? What comes after silicon processors?




Something sideways, that no one was looking out for.

Facebook completely surprised Google, for example.

There may be some new non-cellular way to communicate over long distances, or maybe optical chips will replace silicon.
232   SunnyvaleCA   2020 Oct 14, 4:16pm  

Shaman says
richwicks says
I can't think of anything that would work with 5G and not 4G - well, 3G for that matter.


That’s more a failure of imagination than anything else. Perhaps I can help:
https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/03/20/3-exciting-innovations-made-possible-by-5g.aspx

I'm with Rich on this one.

Please note that 5G could possibly go to 1 gigabit per second, but you're sharing it with others. And that's a best-case scenario. Funny thing is that many parts of the world enjoy fiber-optic to their house and 802.11 AC (which shipped in 2013); that combination can give you 1 gigabit that you don't even have to share with others. So, 5G will really only be giving you patchy, unreliable, shared network speeds that people have had in their homes since 2013.


In light of the above, the inspirational article notes:

• That article wants to use 5G to transmit video and other sensor information to a server farm to make life-and-death decisions of a self-driving car? Surely you jest. Or maybe you have never been through a tunnel. As for flashing a car's firmware ... you could flash at 5G speeds 7 years ago when the car is in your garage and connected to your home 802.11 AC network. Plus, flashing a car of 4G could be done at 3 AM when there's plenty of unused 4G bandwidth.

• The article says we can all enjoy 5G in our homes. Hmm. Or maybe they want 5G hotspots to replace wi-fi hotspots? Either way, many people in many countries have had 5G speeds in the home with great reliability since 2013. Wired networking allows far more multiplexing; I can't imaging 500 homes in a small area all connecting to a single 5G antenna and having better results than the existing copper wire solutions we are using now.

• Using 5G for "wireless VR" is the same concept as putting the computation for self-crashing cars in the cloud, although probably much less dangerous. We can pretty much do the same thing with fiber and 802.11 AC right now. Also, Apple's newest A14 "Bionic" chip — in all the new iPhone 12 models — has enormous hardware capability for VR, video processing, video acceleration, and neural algorithm processing. If anything, Apple seems to be going the other direction by putting these kind of processing capabilities into the phone itself.


The big bonus for 5G seems to be for the carriers. They can now theoretically serve more customers because each customer uses less of the existing bandwidth.
233   zzyzzx   2020 Oct 15, 4:34am  

PeopleUnited says
The limiting factor for enticing people to upgrade to 5g is there is almost no infrastructure for 5g.


It's not like most consumers know that. At this point it's all a marketing scam. I fucking hate the marketing efforts since they tend to ruin everything.
234   zzyzzx   2021 Dec 7, 8:23am  

Around 170 now.
235   GNL   2021 Dec 7, 8:52am  

zzyzzx says
Around 170 now.

Good time to buy?
236   mell   2021 Dec 7, 9:01am  

WineHorror1 says
zzyzzx says
Around 170 now.

Good time to buy?


They forward split so it's actually at an all time high
238   Eric Holder   2022 Aug 24, 11:51am  

Patrick says

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/the-golden-noose-around-apples-neck/


I bought APPL stock in 2009 when I got tired of my co-worker droning about it being "overpriced" and how Apple as a company "can't innovate".

I also bought TSLA when my BIL said in 2013 that the whole thing is bullshit and is going to come crashing down and disappear at any moment (he now drives a Tesla and raves about how the autopilot is a better driver than he is). I like to rub this one in anytime I get the opportunity. =))
240   SunnyvaleCA   2022 Aug 24, 1:19pm  

This thread, which wishfully asks about a $500 AAPL price, was created January 2012. Since then Apple split 7-for-1 in June 2014 and 4-for-1 in August 2020. That's a combined 28x in shares. Reverse-adjusted for those, the original poster would be happy to hear that Apple has exceeded his $500 hopes to the tune of over $5,000 all-time high. Currently the actual price $167, when reverse-adjusted for those splits, is still a lofty $4676.
241   zzyzzx   2023 May 5, 8:18am  

Apple Inc. (AAPL)
$173.43/sh + $7.64 (+4.61%)
As of 11:17AM EDT. Market open.

« First        Comments 228 - 241 of 241        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste