There is a way out of the unprecedented crisis in which the UK has been plunged by the Brexit referendum. Constitutionally, the result does not bind the Government or Parliament, which alone holds the power to initiate the withdrawal procedure enshrined in article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. In the calamitous situation unleashed on the country by the referendum result, and especially given the inadequacy of the mandate that the Leavers purport to hold in consequence of the referendum, the Government would unquestionably be acting, not only constitutionally, but in the national interest, by seeking a fresh political mandate to keep the United Kingdom in the European Union through an early general election.
My belated contribution to the Brexit debate: I cannot see a single reason to vote to Leave. Neither the British economy, nor our exposure to immigration, nor even the sovereignty of the Queen in Parliament would be in any way enhanced by withdrawal, and there are plenty of reasons to fear our country will be weakened.
The challenges facing Adobe are shared by almost all productivity apps. Productivity apps are indispensable (and thus priceless) to some users Productivity apps usually have high learning curves Well-done productivity apps require significant investment up-front Productivity apps require regular maintenance and upgrades Unfortunately, app store economics don’t really work here. f you have a low […]
If you think the war on privacy and the rise of the surveillance state is bad enough in the First World, just imagine how bad it will be in nations where the people are poor, their governments have few checks and balances, and there’s no tradition of civil liberties. And surveillance technology gets cheaper much […]
whether you actually need to upgrade to the iPhone 5 from the iPhone 4S is pretty debatable: the improved hardware makes it worthwhile—but the flimsy materials arguably make it more of W downgrade than anything else. For me, they took much of the excitement out of an otherwise worthy set of small but useful improvements to the device.
Facebook is indeed, as Blodget says, extremely expensive relative to its expected earnings over the next year or two. But, unlike most businesses, Facebook’s long-term upside has nothing to do with its expected earnings over the next year or two. It’s believed by many to be extraordinarily valuable not because of its advertising income but because it has a real chance of becoming a company unlike any that has ever existed before, with the possible exception of pre-breakup AT&T.
It’s amazing how the idea that Facebook somehow succeeded in abolishing the traditional business model (its ‘upside has nothing to do with its expected earnings over the next year or two’) is surviving even the most botched IPO in stock market history. Despite this article being almost surreal in its naivety, it makes fascinating reading.
Facebook isn’t staring into the abyss—yet. But Mr Zuckerberg, like many of his generation, appears structurally incapable of long-term planning. He should have been acutely concerned at the fact that his brainchild’s IPO valuation, at about 65 times consensus 2013 estimated earnings per share, was, by any stretch of the imagination, absurd. Despite the post-IPO correction, it still is. And the idea that Facebook might somehow solve the trap into which it is being drawn in mobile by developing a phone runs directly counter to everything we’ve learned to distrust about the company.
When Microsoft set its sights on a market, it would squeeze the life out of the market leader like an anconda wrapping itself around its prey. Before it was done, the company struck numerous segments, including personal computing (Apple and IBM), word processing (WordPerfect), spreadsheets (Lotus), databases (Borland and Sybase), networking (Novell) and Internet browsers (Netscape).
It’s not hyperbole to say that Apple’s phoenix-like rise and Google’s ascent are directly and positively correlated with Gates’ decision to step away from running his company as CEO in 2000.
A remarkably prescient look at Apple and Google’s recent strategies compared with Microsoft’s in times now past.
My annual celebration of various materialist things this year includes loincloths, shoes with holes in them and, of course, the full list of super-hype software that any Apple fanboy must use at this point in time on pain of being ridiculous.
We launch about 500 changes to search a year, more than a change a day. So if you look at search like a complicated machine, like a giant jumbo jet—although it’s probably, in some ways, more complex than that – this is sort of like changing the engines in flight before you land.
It’s been fashionable dissing Google recently. Their search has actually been getting massively better since I pinpointed a low point last year. This must-read article explains why.