[Sigia-l] Re: Numerology

[Trenouth, John]

> Speaking of numbers, it ought to be a happy day for those in need of
another 
> example of why design sells:

Dell is trading at a 3-year low right now; Apple at an all time high
(2.5 times higher than their last spike 6 years ago).  So your numbers
reflect only a peculiar time--nothing else.

The chart you link to only shows the past year--a trivial and misleading
time frame for comparing investments or market performance.  Try
http://tinyurl.com/c98c2 for the same chart over Dell's and Apple's
respective lifetimes.  The market clearly favors Dell.  

Taking data out of context (especially taking market data out of its
historical context) and presenting it as evidence of some truth is, to
be frank, disingenuous.

This is to say nothing about market caps being driven by many factors
beyond market performance (which itself is driven by many factors beyond
design).  Quoting market caps is superficially dramatic, but ultimately
meaningless without context and insight into why.  Claiing that design
equals big market caps is specious.  

To dig a little deeper one could explain Apple's spike not as the result
of design, but rather as the market's reaction to Apple's strategic move
away from computers and into consumer electronics.  The consumer
electronics market is vastly larger than the personal computer market,
is more global, and much more receptive to sexiness and marketing--two
things Apples excels at.

As far as design goes, if design = style then sure Apple is king.
However as many of us here believe, design is about problem solving.  In
that respect Apple may not be as great as their marketeers and fanboys
would have us believe.  For example
http://www.mobilecommunitydesign.com/archives/000152.php

I'm not saying you're wrong.  I'm just pointing out that much of your
argument relies on red herrings, misrepresentations and giant leaps of
faith.  Hopefully this isn't the best evidence available that design can
impact the bottom line.  Is Apple all there is?