Google Paying for Traffic Over a Network Sets a Bad Precedent

Ewan Spence, at Forbes:

This is a wedge moment. Google appears to have blinked and decided that Android’s market share is more important than the principles behind net neutrality. Orange is quietly letting others know they have a deal in place, and you can be sure the rest of the world’s networks are wondering how they can get their slice of the pie.

This sets a really bad precedent.  I can understand why Google felt that this was a good move (or at least the lesser of two evils), but this business deal will only further encourage the networks to do more 'double-dipping'.

That's honestly what this is, folks: double-dipping.  The networks are upset at their role as 'dumb pipes' and are attempting to grab more money by charging end users for Internet service and trying to bully web services (like Google) into also paying for the privilege of delivering services to those users.

France Wants to Tax the Collection of Private Data on the Internet

Eric Pfanner, writing for The New York Times:

The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising.

I can empathize with the dilemma facing governments today. The world economy, in general, has not been good and the related tax revenue has been impacted.  However, that doesn't excuse naked cash-grabs like this proposal. Trying to argue that users of Internet services are 'working' for those companies is like trying to argue that the act of cooking a hamburger is a form of 'manufacturing'.

As it has been said, "The only things certain in life are death and taxes."

Microsoft Should Be Allowed To Have Sales, Too

Paul Thurrott, on Supersite for Windows:

How dare Microsoft make Windows 8 Pro available so cheaply for a pre-set period of time and then simply begin pricing it normally exactly when they previously announced they would do so. How dare they!

As Paul correctly points out in his article, there isn't any good reason for folks to be angry at Microsoft.  The pricing was clearly on a time-limited promotional basis.  The normal pricing is exactly the same as Windows 7 pricing.  

Perhaps part of the reason for the outrage is the way some in the tech media have presented the story in their headlines.  Instead of choosing a headline like "Microsoft Is Jacking Up The Price Of Windows 8 Upgrades", why not choose the more neutral (and honestly, more accurate) headline of "Promotional Pricing Ends for Windows 8 Upgrades"?

The iPhone 5 Doesn't Need 'Saving' (and Neither Does Apple)

Rick Aristotle Munarriz, in an article for The Motley Fool:

An early upgrade cycle isn't necessarily unusual for Apple. When the tech giant introduced the new iPad two months ago, it came just eight months after the third generation of the iconic tablet. Apple even raised the stakes by rolling out the lower-priced iPad Mini at the same time.

However, it's clear that sooner will be better than later at a time when the market's starting to lose faith in the magnetism of the iPhone 5. Even before this week's unconfirmed report of Apple scaling back supplier orders for iPhone 5 screens, analysts performing channel checks were talking down their projections.

Misek himself is now lowering his shipment expectations for the current quarter from 48 million to 44 million. It's certainly not as bad as some of the gloomier revisions out there, but it's just one more connected pro hosing down his forecast.

The hubbub began when The Wall Street Journal reported on information from Japan's Nikkei regarding dour news for the iPhone 5. The key point in the WSJ report was this line:

Apple’s orders for iPhone 5 screens for the first quarter, for example, have dropped to roughly half of what the company had planned to order, the people said.

However, as noted in a rebuttal by Mark Rogowsky on Forbes:

What’s missing from that quote, however, is what Nikkei originally included and can still be found on Reuters (although no longer on WSJ): “Apple has asked Japan Display, Sharp and LG Display Co Ltd to roughly halve supplies of LCD panels from an initial plan for about 65 million screens in January-March, the Nikkei cited people familiar with the situation as saying.” And that 65 million number we know is completely absurd.

65 million LCD panels is indeed absurd. A chart in an article by Dan Gallagher for MarketWatch shows a much more reasonable (but still very high) estimate of 48 million. It should be noted that this 48 million number is much closer to the "48 million to 44 million" referenced above. 65 million iPhones would be off the chart (literally).

The stock market has completely unrealistic expectations for Apple. For some reason, in the market's opinion it is not good enough for Apple to simply be a top level competitor in the marketplace, it has to dominate in order to be considered worthy.

I don't know what Apple will say in next week's quarterly results call, but I'm fairly certain that it will be something to the effect of 'we sold bunches and bunches of the iPhone 5'.