Or, for another way of looking at reality…

I am a bit of a tech nerd, and one of my favorite tech sections is simply anything related to Apple. Not because I love Apple, though I do generally like their products, and not because I am one of the obsessed “fanbois” (what a childish term, mostly reserved for use by people who can’t be bothered to consider why someone might actually like company X’s products, usually because they have no concept of other minds) but because Apple vs The World is one of the few places you can see absolute rabid hatred on the part of people who have no skin in the game. It is like watching religions fight. It is like having a seat in the house where two brothers who love different NFL teams get together for the Super Bowl. Between their teams. Except without the face painting. Usually.

Just like politics.

Anyway, their was a great post a few days back on Daring Fireball (great, mostly tech, blog) about the level that the anti-Apple crowd will drop to to make a case that doesn’t exist. It is like Obama Derangement Syndrome. Maybe worse.

Amir Efrati, reporting for the Wall Street Journal on those numbers from Good Technology regarding mobile device activations in large corporations, paragraphs one and two:

There are signs that Apple’s grip on tablets has been weakened among consumers, who are buying more devices made by Samsung and Amazon. Now the trend is trickling into the business market.

That’s according to new data from Good Technology, one of the biggest mobile device managers, known as MDMs, that give tools to corporate IT managers to oversee employee devices.

And Gruber is right. If you just skimmed the first few paragraphs, that story is enough to make you sell your Apple stock. Apple is losing ground among consumers? Samsung and Amazon are taking over the market? And now companies are going that way too? Great, this isn’t just a fickle consumer issue, companies are looking at Apple and then saying no thanks, we don’t want your tablet. This is clearly bad news for Apple.

Two paragraphs later, we get the actual numbers:

Out of all of the tablets that installed Good’s management software during 2012, Android’s share grew from 2.7% in the first quarter to 6.8% by the fourth quarter, with the iPad grabbing nearly the entire rest of the market.

“We’re seeing some glimmers of Android tablet adoption,” said John Herrema, an executive at Good Technology.

Wait what? That is “loosing its grip?” When you have 90% plus of a market that is your losing trend? In a market you created out of thin air, suddenly you are down to over 90% of that market! Dear god, man the life boats!

And that ignores the profit issue. Most people who have looked at the current tablet market will tell you that most of the competing tablets are being sold at a loss. To get to 6.8% A loss. How is that business model gonna work long term?

And then only at the bottom of the article do we see that, according to Good, iOS is actually doing better than Android year-over-year:

Overall, Apple’s iPad and iPhone devices made up 77% of new devices using Good Technology software last year, up from 71% in 2011, with Android-powered devices making up much of the rest.

The headline for Efrati’s story? “Report: Android Tablets Gain on iPads in Business Market”.

So when all types of devices (phones and tablets) are a factor Apple 77% of new devices in a world once dominated by RIM and Microsoft, and 90% of the tablet subcategory. Thus they are losing. Only in tech could you get this kind of totally made up… bull… dammit.

Sen. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III had a task for the GAO: take out all the reform in Obamacare, and tell me what happens to the deficit. Via Steve Benen, he got the answer he wanted: the deficit increases.

Oh come on, seriously?

Sessions told the GAO to project what would happen if the provisions of the bill designed to curb projected growth in health care spending—the Independent Payment Advisory Board, the excise tax on high-cost plans, and reductions in Medicare payments to providers based on performance—were repealed or phased out over time. The GAO said that, yes, taking the cost-saving stuff out of the law, but leaving the rest intact, would cost more money and increase the deficit. But here’s what else the GAO said: If the law is implemented as passed, with the cost-saving measures intact, the deficit will decrease 1.5 percent as a share of the economy over the next 75 years, and 1.2 percent of this improvement in the deficit is directly attributed to the Affordable Care Act.

Really? If we remove the money saving parts of the law, we don’t save money? No shit?

Hey Sessions, quick question: If we remove all the parts designed to improve safety from cars, will car fatalities go up? If we remove all the sections of building code designed to prevent or limit fire damage, will future buildings be greater fire risk?

In typical republican reality denying style, Fox, National Review, Limbaugh, (though lets be fair, he only has 2 advertisers and 7 listeners left) and Drudge all ran with the story. Do you think the rightwing echo chamber kept the important details? Any bets?

The real irony though is that these are the same people who hold up the imaginary “confidence fairy” job growth idea, while claiming that savings that we are already beginning to see based on the Affordable Care Act are just not possible.

America’s job creators want certainty and confidence in the economy.
Jobs and the Punting of Responsibility
By Jeff Sessions & Paul Ryan

Damn straight.

How can you ignore billions in savings while also insuring millions who need and deserve medical help but claim that tax cuts make jobs? It is easy. Just like seeing the incomplete pass that was 4 yards out of bounds should have been a good catch, or seeing that dominating a market is actually losing your grip. It is just so hard to see through the face paint sometimes.

  1. #1 by Larry Bergan on March 3, 2013 - 7:23 pm

    It’s probably true that Limbag only has seven listeners.

    They should pay off his contract and put somebody on with integrity who can save the stations.

    I think it’s called cutting your losses.

(will not be published)


%d bloggers like this: