AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 04:09 PM
Yes I know that they operate under their parent group so what's your point? I salute you for having the ability to google that information.
I didn't need to google, that's something I know.
Which you obviously didn't since your argument was why Apple should worry about their market share when Ferrari and Porsche aren't. They should just continue to make exclusive products.
I bet they worried right up and until they got bought by a company that didn't worry about making cheaper products.
I didn't need to google, that's something I know.
Which you obviously didn't since your argument was why Apple should worry about their market share when Ferrari and Porsche aren't. They should just continue to make exclusive products.
I bet they worried right up and until they got bought by a company that didn't worry about making cheaper products.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 12:32 PM
I joined Mobile Me (.Mac) in 2003 and haven't looked back.
What I like:
1. Amazing SPAM filtering (less than 25 SPAM emails since 2003)
2. Keychain sync between my 3 Macs
3. Calendar sync between my iPhone / Mac
4. Bookmark sync between my iPhone / Mac
5. Preferences sync between my 3 Macs
6. Secure iChats
7. Disposable email aliases
8. Find my iPhone / Remote wipe (could be very handy)
What I don't like:
1. iDisk whenever I have used is painfully slow and unreliable
2. iPhoto album publish is slow and unreliable
3. Price
Just my opinion and I intend to pay again this year if it's not free, if it is free I hope they maintain the good points and improve the bad points.
mrzippy you bring up a great point. I've only got one Mac so my sync is generally going to my iPhone and iPad. If you've got a couple of Macs then
Keychain sync
Pref sync
Dock items sync
Would be a godsend. In fact I am getting a second Mac soon and thus I will enable those features to be sync'd.
What I like:
1. Amazing SPAM filtering (less than 25 SPAM emails since 2003)
2. Keychain sync between my 3 Macs
3. Calendar sync between my iPhone / Mac
4. Bookmark sync between my iPhone / Mac
5. Preferences sync between my 3 Macs
6. Secure iChats
7. Disposable email aliases
8. Find my iPhone / Remote wipe (could be very handy)
What I don't like:
1. iDisk whenever I have used is painfully slow and unreliable
2. iPhoto album publish is slow and unreliable
3. Price
Just my opinion and I intend to pay again this year if it's not free, if it is free I hope they maintain the good points and improve the bad points.
mrzippy you bring up a great point. I've only got one Mac so my sync is generally going to my iPhone and iPad. If you've got a couple of Macs then
Keychain sync
Pref sync
Dock items sync
Would be a godsend. In fact I am getting a second Mac soon and thus I will enable those features to be sync'd.
Blakeco123
Apr 23, 04:37 PM
sorry just a correction the resolution isnt 3200x3200 its 3200x2000 i just checked
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
doubleusn
Mar 29, 09:34 AM
Looks nice as a place to store off site backup type stuff, but I still don't see how all this space as a digital music locker for streaming (again the back up part is nice) is all that viable at this time (Amazon, Apple, whoever) as data is getting capped more and more, and will cost more money as more things look to help you blow past your data-cap.
iTunes on iPhone in auto = no data usage, no interruptions.
iTunes on iPhone in auto streaming = data usage, and stream issues ...3G is not everywhere yet.
It is the future, but I until the US cell company's play ball on a cost effective way to do it (the att/tmoe merger won't help) then I don't see this working so well in the US.
iTunes on iPhone in auto = no data usage, no interruptions.
iTunes on iPhone in auto streaming = data usage, and stream issues ...3G is not everywhere yet.
It is the future, but I until the US cell company's play ball on a cost effective way to do it (the att/tmoe merger won't help) then I don't see this working so well in the US.
MacAddict1978
Apr 25, 10:28 AM
I can't really see any reason for Apple to track people. They are not Google. The author of that email is an idiot. Posts on other sites about the issue from FanDroids have been laughable, as they seem to think Google would never track them. That's kind of the nature of the their business. Google tracks everything you do, and is in the news almost weekly for controversial tracking practices.
Cnet had an interesting article showing how law enforcement has been using this data in the iPhone for over a year, and cites incidents where it's been used in court to place people at the vicinity of crimes and show their movements:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20056344-281.html
I don't think Apple is watching our movements the way that Google does. Google wants to know where you are, where you've been, what sites you surf, what products you look at, what you search for, what color you fence is in the front yard... it helps them serve up ads. If Apple used any data, I think it would be for technical improvements, and when you set up an IOS device it does give you an option to send or not to send data back to Apple for those reasons.
http://cnettv.cnet.com/skynet-here/9742-1_53-50103658.html This was a fun clip picking on Google and comparing them to Skynet.
Cnet had an interesting article showing how law enforcement has been using this data in the iPhone for over a year, and cites incidents where it's been used in court to place people at the vicinity of crimes and show their movements:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20056344-281.html
I don't think Apple is watching our movements the way that Google does. Google wants to know where you are, where you've been, what sites you surf, what products you look at, what you search for, what color you fence is in the front yard... it helps them serve up ads. If Apple used any data, I think it would be for technical improvements, and when you set up an IOS device it does give you an option to send or not to send data back to Apple for those reasons.
http://cnettv.cnet.com/skynet-here/9742-1_53-50103658.html This was a fun clip picking on Google and comparing them to Skynet.
SactoGuy18
Mar 27, 01:12 PM
I don't believe the TechCrunch story. http://www.en.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/blum3.gif
Wasn't there a rumor that Apple was going to hold a public event in April to demonstrate iOS 5.0 for the first time and it will be released in July at the same time that the iPhone 5 reaches retailers?
Wasn't there a rumor that Apple was going to hold a public event in April to demonstrate iOS 5.0 for the first time and it will be released in July at the same time that the iPhone 5 reaches retailers?
robertgenito
Nov 3, 02:23 PM
The next phases of Sopho's agenda:
1) create more "viruses" and get as much media hype as possible. This will ensure a larger demand of their free product.
2) once a significant number of users are registered and using their free product, force them to update their application--for new virus protection. this new update will lock them into a 30-day trial mode :) users will have to pay $60 per year in order to stay protected.
I'm not worried at all honestly. I'm just even happier to be running a unix-based operating system :)
1) create more "viruses" and get as much media hype as possible. This will ensure a larger demand of their free product.
2) once a significant number of users are registered and using their free product, force them to update their application--for new virus protection. this new update will lock them into a 30-day trial mode :) users will have to pay $60 per year in order to stay protected.
I'm not worried at all honestly. I'm just even happier to be running a unix-based operating system :)
URFloorMatt
Mar 28, 12:19 PM
Hmm. I suppose this increases the likelihood of the next iPhone being the "iPhone 4G" after all.
That said, my 3GS contract is up in June. If Apple waits until October to release the next iPhone, and it's not LTE, then I will be jumping ship. Never thought I'd say that, but I'm not holding onto a 3G-only phone until almost 2013.
That said, my 3GS contract is up in June. If Apple waits until October to release the next iPhone, and it's not LTE, then I will be jumping ship. Never thought I'd say that, but I'm not holding onto a 3G-only phone until almost 2013.
Am3822
Sep 11, 05:59 AM
It would be one of them movie/media thingies, so my pessimistic newb bones inform me.
LagunaSol
Apr 20, 01:47 AM
Love the look and feel of the current model - makes everything else on the market look like cheap junk. I hope the rumor is true and Apple leaves the external design as-is. Like the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro, this is a design that will look great for many years.
frankie
Sep 15, 10:00 PM
I'd be happy if it was the same enclosure with a Merom CPU and an upgraded GPU - ATI X1800 or nVidia 7700 would be nice.
A longer-life battery would be nice but I can't see it happening due to weight.
If you really want longer battery life, then you should be hoping to keep the X1600. It's regarded as having the best "performance per watt" of recent mobile GPUs.
Personally, I hope (well, pipe dream actually) they'll make MBP build-to-order like Mac Pro. I'd downgrade the CPU to the 2.0GHz version. It wholesales for $130 less than the 2.16, and $340 less than the 2.33. That's way too much to pay for a fractional speed increase.
OTOH, the 2.0 Xeon is $370 less than the 2.66 and Apple only cuts the price $75 for two of them. That's robbery. So I guess MBP BTO probably wouldn't help me even if they did it.
A longer-life battery would be nice but I can't see it happening due to weight.
If you really want longer battery life, then you should be hoping to keep the X1600. It's regarded as having the best "performance per watt" of recent mobile GPUs.
Personally, I hope (well, pipe dream actually) they'll make MBP build-to-order like Mac Pro. I'd downgrade the CPU to the 2.0GHz version. It wholesales for $130 less than the 2.16, and $340 less than the 2.33. That's way too much to pay for a fractional speed increase.
OTOH, the 2.0 Xeon is $370 less than the 2.66 and Apple only cuts the price $75 for two of them. That's robbery. So I guess MBP BTO probably wouldn't help me even if they did it.
nitynate
Sep 11, 05:27 AM
:rolleyes:
Well, my generation, we dont need wheel barrows!
We get 10MB/s connections.
Aye.
Well, my generation, we dont need wheel barrows!
We get 10MB/s connections.
Aye.
diamond.g
May 4, 03:00 PM
Great...until you need to do a reinstall. While you could go 10.6 >10.7, going straight to 10.7 is so much better.
Except when your HD becomes toast...
Correct, but people are still reaonably concerned with total drive-failures where you have to pull the whole thing out.
Nope, there's no restriction.
Look, I'm not talking about what's allowed. I'm talking about what's possible. The post I'm replying to specifically said "abuse" in it. If we're talking about people breaking the rules, the question is: What's going to stop them?
With Snow Leopard the answer is nothing, really.
So true, I suppose you would need to reinstall at least 10.6.6.
That is the process now right? I wonder if they will make TM more like the Windows backup, in the respect that it can take an image of your system for the purpose of a "bare metal" restore...
Except when your HD becomes toast...
Correct, but people are still reaonably concerned with total drive-failures where you have to pull the whole thing out.
Nope, there's no restriction.
Look, I'm not talking about what's allowed. I'm talking about what's possible. The post I'm replying to specifically said "abuse" in it. If we're talking about people breaking the rules, the question is: What's going to stop them?
With Snow Leopard the answer is nothing, really.
So true, I suppose you would need to reinstall at least 10.6.6.
That is the process now right? I wonder if they will make TM more like the Windows backup, in the respect that it can take an image of your system for the purpose of a "bare metal" restore...
Pez555
Mar 28, 10:28 AM
Sort of relieved no iPhone 5 announcements, Im firmly bogged down into a 2 year contract.
long haircuts 2011 with bangs.
long haircuts 2011 women.
2011 Long Curly Hairstyles.
Celebrity Long Haircuts
iMacZealot
Jul 30, 02:13 AM
apple could start their own service. like virgin, ampd, boost, and now helio. they all have there own phones and service.
Amp'd is actually owned by Verizon, adnd Boost is owned by SprintNextel, using the same chirping technology as Nextel. Forgot the deal about Virgin.
Amp'd is actually owned by Verizon, adnd Boost is owned by SprintNextel, using the same chirping technology as Nextel. Forgot the deal about Virgin.
LordTyroxx
Apr 5, 02:21 PM
The people that are against apple here (and want the advertisement to stay) are the same people that are so against iAds. It's quite ridiculous. I find it extremely odd that a large company be a part of the jailbreak community to begin with. They could've used iAd and had much more success anyway. That theme is ugly. I don't want advertisements on my iphone if i jailbreak it. That's stupid. If i want a scion theme, there's probably 25 other people that have made better ones. So it's a moot point. Get your panties out of a wad.
I do give toyota props for having the balls to put something out on a jailbroken iphone. It's inventive and sneaky.
I think the only way people on here would be happy is if there was a little toggle on their iphone that switched between, I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO VIEW ADVERTISEMENTS, and ADVERTISEMENTS TAKE AWAY MY FREEDOM!
I do give toyota props for having the balls to put something out on a jailbroken iphone. It's inventive and sneaky.
I think the only way people on here would be happy is if there was a little toggle on their iphone that switched between, I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO VIEW ADVERTISEMENTS, and ADVERTISEMENTS TAKE AWAY MY FREEDOM!
MacGiver
Mar 27, 04:33 AM
The fall release would reportedly also coincide with the release of a third-generation iPad (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/09/ipad-3-to-arrive-this-september/)
iPad 3 this fall? I thought it was next month? iPad 4 this fall and iPad 5 for Xmas would make more sense to me...
If Apple starts playing that game they will loose credibility, customers would be kind of lost. One breakthrough per year is good...no more and for sure no less.
iPad 3 this fall? I thought it was next month? iPad 4 this fall and iPad 5 for Xmas would make more sense to me...
If Apple starts playing that game they will loose credibility, customers would be kind of lost. One breakthrough per year is good...no more and for sure no less.
kavika411
Apr 14, 12:03 PM
Republicans - "I am in favor of decreasing government spending, and I have the opportunity to put my money where my mouth is by voluntarily not utilizing government programs, but I am nonetheless going to utilize of those programs if other people do."
Democrats - "I am in favor of increasing government taxation, and I have the opportunity to put my money where my mouth is by voluntarily paying more taxes, but I am nonetheless not going to if other people don't."
Republicans - "The economy is doing great. Therefore, now is the time to cut the highest tax rates."
Republicans - "The economy is doing awful. Therefore, now is the time to cut the highest tax rates."
Democrats - "The economy is doing great. Therefore, now is the time to increase the highest tax rates."
Democrats - "The economy is doing awful. Therefore, now is the time to increase the highest tax rates."
Personally, I think we need to increase taxes across the board. Otherwise, we won't have enough money to continue the three wars we are in, and we would be forced to pull out of them. That would be awful.
Democrats - "I am in favor of increasing government taxation, and I have the opportunity to put my money where my mouth is by voluntarily paying more taxes, but I am nonetheless not going to if other people don't."
Republicans - "The economy is doing great. Therefore, now is the time to cut the highest tax rates."
Republicans - "The economy is doing awful. Therefore, now is the time to cut the highest tax rates."
Democrats - "The economy is doing great. Therefore, now is the time to increase the highest tax rates."
Democrats - "The economy is doing awful. Therefore, now is the time to increase the highest tax rates."
Personally, I think we need to increase taxes across the board. Otherwise, we won't have enough money to continue the three wars we are in, and we would be forced to pull out of them. That would be awful.
munkery
Nov 7, 07:28 PM
I've always thought virii has to be engineered under contract by companies making the "solutions" to them, there are far too many virii out there on a daily basis, to such an extent that it has to be developed on a full-time basis with some corporate involvement somewhere. There are a lot more things to do for kicks these days, other than write malware, you'd think people have better things to do, unless there is money in making them.
Take what you want from here (http://www.exploit-db.com/) and build your malware with this (http://www.metasploit.com/). Malware writers use the same software as security researchers.
It is actually pretty easy to do using sources for already known exploits; finding new exploits is the difficult part. Some of the exploits in an exploit database may not be patched. Others may be patched for up to date systems but are meant for those not getting updates (for example, because running pirated version of an OS).
Take what you want from here (http://www.exploit-db.com/) and build your malware with this (http://www.metasploit.com/). Malware writers use the same software as security researchers.
It is actually pretty easy to do using sources for already known exploits; finding new exploits is the difficult part. Some of the exploits in an exploit database may not be patched. Others may be patched for up to date systems but are meant for those not getting updates (for example, because running pirated version of an OS).
mentaluproar
Nov 3, 07:10 PM
I used to have iantivirus, but got rid of it because it would grab onto 150% or some ridiculous number of the processor and never let go. Sophos, on the other hand, is lightweight and unobtrusive.
swingerofbirch
Jul 30, 01:10 AM
I've been eligible to upgrade my Verizon phone for a while now (new every 2), but have held off because the phones all seem so gimmicky. I like Verizon call quality, but I feel like their phones (all cell phones) are dictated by what the service providers want to be able to sell (Vcast, etc).
So they add cameras and EVDO etc to make more money from the associated services they offer.
The only two feature requests I ever have from a cell phone are: better reception and better battery life.
I have never cared about the other features, because I prefered carrying devices that specialized in those areas, ie a separate digital camera and an iPod.
However, it seems that Apple's major competition going forward will be from cell phone carriers who sell songs (albeit at 3.99/each) directly to cell phones.
The cell phone carriers have the advantage in that a lot of people will be buying these devices whether they want MP3 players or not. You have a cell phone, you've got an MP3 player. And not only that, you don't need a PC to buy music, you do it right from the phone.
Going forward the quality of phones as Mp3 players and cameras and the phones' music store experiences will improve, and Apple obviously realizes this will be their competition (more so I believe than a Wifi enabled Zune).
Perhaps Apple's wild-bet will be a device that is a master of all trades. They could combine iPod with Newton PDA a cell phone and a decent camera (iSight?).
I would imagine that to offer a device like this and not have it hobbled by terrible software and keep it fairly open, Apple will need to create their own wireless network. They do have 9.5 billion.
:)
I think it's where the future is headed. But it's a big bet. But in business it's also a bet not to take a big bet sometimes.
So they add cameras and EVDO etc to make more money from the associated services they offer.
The only two feature requests I ever have from a cell phone are: better reception and better battery life.
I have never cared about the other features, because I prefered carrying devices that specialized in those areas, ie a separate digital camera and an iPod.
However, it seems that Apple's major competition going forward will be from cell phone carriers who sell songs (albeit at 3.99/each) directly to cell phones.
The cell phone carriers have the advantage in that a lot of people will be buying these devices whether they want MP3 players or not. You have a cell phone, you've got an MP3 player. And not only that, you don't need a PC to buy music, you do it right from the phone.
Going forward the quality of phones as Mp3 players and cameras and the phones' music store experiences will improve, and Apple obviously realizes this will be their competition (more so I believe than a Wifi enabled Zune).
Perhaps Apple's wild-bet will be a device that is a master of all trades. They could combine iPod with Newton PDA a cell phone and a decent camera (iSight?).
I would imagine that to offer a device like this and not have it hobbled by terrible software and keep it fairly open, Apple will need to create their own wireless network. They do have 9.5 billion.
:)
I think it's where the future is headed. But it's a big bet. But in business it's also a bet not to take a big bet sometimes.
nasty devil
Apr 24, 12:46 AM
Are the current iMacs not retina enough? Lol
But I wouldn't mind, if prices are the same :D
But I wouldn't mind, if prices are the same :D
itcheroni
Apr 15, 06:25 PM
Which "game"? Are you "trading and investing" in companies by purchasing shares in IPOs, or are you "trading and investing" on Wall St.? If it is the latter, then basically you are buying and selling ownership interests in companies, which has almost no affect on underlying companies.
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. So, even if nothing "good" comes out of trading, one shouldn't have to make apologies for it. And if you were only able to invest in IPO's, who would you sell it to? Why invest in an IPO if you can never sell it?
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. So, even if nothing "good" comes out of trading, one shouldn't have to make apologies for it. And if you were only able to invest in IPO's, who would you sell it to? Why invest in an IPO if you can never sell it?