Introduction Of Smartphones To Business Management Essay

Introduction Of Smartphones To Business Management Essay 3.1 Introduction This chapter discuss about factors that influences the business environment used by PEST model. Then also discuss industry concept of competition, competitor analysis, such as strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats. 3.2 Introduction of Smartphone In 1973, Motorola introduced a first cellular telephone, and then no one had imagined that this would ignite a whole new technological change: The Mobile Revolution. Typical cell phones were used only for voice calling and later for text messaging, but with growth in mobile phone adoption, cell phones are now available with a number of different features like e-mail, video and audio facilities, internet access, etc. Thus, a whole new change in this mobile sector happened and the smartphone race began. This race also created competition between operators and handset manufacturers in getting more returns from mobile phone equipment and services. The rise in the smartphone segment accompanies the mobile internet revolution. However, the main reasons are better margins for Original Equipment Manufactures (OEMs) and higher Average revenue per user (ARPU) for operators. The smartphone is basically a combination of operating system, application, and handset manufacturers. In addition, due t o the increase in the application market of the smartphone and the growing popularity of OS used for mobile systems, it can be said that the near future will witness the most powerfull application running on phones with high powered operating systems. Considering current growth in the smartphone sector, it is estimated to grow by at least 18-20% by 2011 according to iSuppli. Following table shows sales of smartphones during year 2008 and 2009. Worldwide Smartphone Sales to End Users in 2009 (Thousands of Units) Company 2009 Sales Market Share (%) 2008 Sales Market Share (%) Nokia 440,881.6 36.4 472,314.9 38.9 Samsung 235,772.0 19.5 199,324.3 16.3 LG 122,055.3 10.1 102.789.1 8.4 Motorola 58,475.2 4.8 106.522.4 8.7 Sony Ericsson 54,873.4 4.5 93,106.1 7.6 Other 299,179.2 24.7 248,196.1 20.3 Total 1,211,236.6 100.0 1222,252.9 100.0 Table 1: World Smartphone Sales 3.2.1 Overview of Different Smartphone Operating Systems Before moving to Android and iPhone, it is necessary to understand 3.3 PEST Analysis PEST analysis is stands for Political, Economic, Social, and Technological analysis and describes a framework of macro-environmental factors used in the environmental scanning component of strategic management Political impact: Whether the diffusion of Smartphone will contribute to information control and national unity, or strengthen information flow and centrifugal forces are question. However, it may enhance individual rights of political involvement by spreading political information and critiques easier and faster than before. As a result, traditional government control of information traffic maybe weakened. Calgary (1994) mentioned that, by using the increasing economic interests of the foreign business in China and Hong Kong, the Chinese government could take advantage of the lobby power of the foreign telecommunications multinationals involved in the diffusion of mobile communications in China as a political card to force foreign governments to make favorable policies toward China. The permission of allowing AT T to sell its used mobile communications system in part of China and Chinas good relation with Motorola are two examples of an indirect political impact from the diffusion. Economic impact: The diffusion of Smartphone communications can help China and Hong Kong economic development. Wireless communications devices can provide convenience to commercial mobility and prompt access to business information in the current social wave of doing business first in China and Hong Kong. Business becomes more mobile than ever in an information age, but chinas still poor wired telecommunications network cannot meet the demand for mobile communications which keep the information sharing and exchange fast to avoid the long time economic bottleneck Chinas limited wired networks and transportation capabilities. There the Chinese people, believing time is money, turn their eyes to pagers and cellular phones as a very useful business tool to make money. As a result, the diffusion of mobile communications adds a new push to Chinas increasing economic activities. China is a unique, large market where a low per capita income combines with consumers desire for advanced communications products. Smartphone in China have created a profitable business in China in the past few years. Benefited by the present demand exceeding supply, sales and operations of pagers and cellular phones can get capital back very fast. Also according to the Western telecommunication professionals, the economics of wireless technology as an alternative to wired services looks even more appealing. Due to difficult terrain, long local loops and the constant need for repairs, the cost of adding a new wired subscriber in China averages around $2k and is often more. But wireless technology cuts this by half. The demand for Smartphone has made the multinationals such as Microsoft, Apple and Android increase their sales and investment in China and Hong Kong. Thus China and Hong Kong can improve its inadequate communication system which has been one of the bottlenecks of its economic development by having the aid of these foreign resources. Also with more foreign players competing in Chinas market for mobile communications, China will be in a favorable position to make better business deals by the way of using one against another. However, the increasing market demand for imported finished products also drains more scarce foreign exchanges out of Chinas reserves. In turn the foreign drain may hurt Chinas economic expansion in other areas such as energy and transportation. Social impact: The diffusion will change the way the Chinese communicate and work. With more Smartphone devices used, the social contacts will increase so much that more social activities will be arranged easily and on time. These objects also provide a convenient channel for the personal dialogue among family members and friends who have been able to get together often like before because of busier individual time schedules and scattered living spaces. Also with more Smartphone adopters, social concerns about health safety, privacy, and intrusiveness will become salient gradually, though some of them are ignored by the Chinese at present time because of the Chinese basically positive attitude toward technological innovations and the relatively small portion of Smartphone users among the Chinese. At the same time, the diffusion, along with other socioeconomic factors, has widened the socioeconomic gap between the early Chinese adopters and the late adopters or have-nots. Smartphone with their unreasonably high cost add a new symbol into the upstart culture which is usually regarded as a negative social phenomenon in Chinas media and a disgusting social habit in most Chinese eyes. A cultural conflict between the haves and the have-nots occurs. The haves want to show their mobile phones in certain public occasions to let others know their social images: they are bus, they are dealing business, they have money, they have more social connections, so they are important. Most users also think the negative social comments on them are form the have-nots jealous psychology; the have-nots hate to see the impudence because they know most of the self-funded Chinese cellular users are dubious people with less education background and less social taste, some of them even are former crimina ls. Sun (1992) mentioned that, the have-lots also believe many of the users can afford a Smartphone because their money is made not through productive activities but through trade, speculation, or gambling on the stock market. The show-off manner of wealth has been accepted by many Chinese interviewees as an eye-catching feature in the Chinese culture though it is never seen as a good behavior. They think, however, that when more Chinese can afford the price lowering Smartphone and accessing mobile communications, the social cultural conflict will be resolved automatically because the present symbol of social status will be worth nothing when more people have Smartphone. This judgment is reasonable, but its prerequisite depends on the diffusion rate of Smartphone in China and Hong Kong. In addition, the diffusion of mobile communications may increase governments social control resource by equipping the police with various wireless devices to locate possible protesters, as one of the government preventive measures showed during the incident anniversaries these years. Technology impact: The diffusion of Smartphone help more Chinese become aware of the technical advances of the wireless innovations. In general, the peoples think natural science and technology are value-free and the continuing technological improvements and adaptations are positive to national development. They see the winners in todays world as determined by economic strengths and technological advantages, rather than ideology and military. So more people usually take a welcome attitude to new technology and like to get more knowledge about the innovations, unless they cannot afford or understand these new technologies. As for the Chinese communication professionals, the diffusion of mobile communications can make them learn more about equipment design, production, and standards either from imported products or from various technology transfer means such as joint venture and cooperative development. Because of their high-education and tech-management background, they have more ability, as change agents, to persuade the decision makers and common Chinese to adopt or reject certain technologies. The diffusion has helped its communications systems to catch up with the mobile communications technological trend in the world. The Chinese accepted the fact of their backwardness in most high-tech fields, but the professionals also know the leapfrogging advantage in a later adopter, having more technological choices after comparative evaluations, saving time and capital. The quick adoption to program controlled switches and optical fibers has provided a successful experience to the improvement of wired networks. So the improvement wireless communication technologies also gives more alternatives among the updated and appropriate innovations to leapfrog its mobile communications system. On the other hand, the diffusion also increases the technology dependence of foreign wireless innovators. Although can take advantage of leapfrogging by importing, it will never obtain the most advanced technology and the key techniques. But the diffusion will stimulate market demands for newer mobile innovations, thus technologically rely on the wireless pioneers from the developed countries for quite a long time, regardless of how strong its national pride is. In short, the diffusion of mobile communications, on one hand, does raise the Chineses knowledge level and enhance Chins communication capability. On the other hand, it also reinforces the technology determinism in the Chinese minds and its technology dependence on the developed countries.

Breed Specific Legislation

INTRODUCTION Capture Attention Last week this man attacked and wounded another man at Mt. Scott Park, here in Portland, OR. Because of his actions I need all of the students with facial hair, dark shirts, tattoos and long hair to stand up. Effective immediately, all of you will be detained by local authorities because you have been deemed a threat to the safety of our community and the citizens who reside here. Significance/Relevance Breed Specific Legislation is not a new way to manage aggressive dogs.These changes in laws tend to happen after a highly publicized dog attack takes place. This type of legislation punishes the breed, not the deed. Credibility As a dog owner who spends everyday of his life with a breed of dog often found on breed ban lists, researching BSL is as much a part of my life as my dog, Lucky. Thesis Breed Specific Legislation aims to keep citizens safe by punishing innocent and guilty dogs alike. Preview Today, I’m going to share some information on wha t Breed Specific Legislation is, how it affects dogs and dog owners. The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way in which its animals are treated† – Gandhi BODY I. What is Breed Specific Legislation? A. Breed-specific legislation is the banning or restriction of the ownership of a dog solely based on the dog's breed regardless of the dog's personal history or temperament. i. BSL has been around for years, but according to www. dogsbite. org â€Å"in the last decade over 650 U. S. cities have enacted BSL as a preventative measure to reduce dog attacks and bites to protect citizens. B. Breed-specific legislation is based on the premise that certain breeds are inherently dangerous and that public safety can be accomplished by banning or restricting only those dogs. C. Currently, BSL focuses not on a specific breed, but rather a type of dog. That type, as most of you know, is referred to as the â€Å"pit-bull†. The term pit bull general ly refers to a Staffordshire bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, American pit bull terrier, or any dog that is a cross or mix of the aforementioned breeds.A pit bull may also mean any dog that has the appearance and physical characteristics that are substantially similar to the above listed breeds. Therefore, pit bull is a type of dog not a breed. Breed Specific Legislation exists, this is a fact. Facts create norms, but truth creates illumination. II. How it affects dogs A. Breed specific laws target and punish all dogs of a particular breed (the guilty ones as well as the innocent). Well-behaved dogs of that particular breed are seen, classified, and treated the same as the dogs that have in fact bitten or attacked individuals. i.According to an article run in the October edition (2009) of the Westword, a local publication in Denver, in 2006 â€Å"after a one-year moratorium Denver began to again enforce the pit bull ban in 2005, causing a 77 percent increase in the num ber of dogs impounded in Pit Bull Row. City records show that between 2005 and 2006,  1,454 pit bulls were put down, leading to the large pile-ups of dead dogs. † ii. Unfortunately, many of these dogs were deemed pit bulls simply because the animal control officer, shelter worker, dog trainer, politician, dog owner, police officer or newspaper says they are. B.BSL doesn’t acknowledge the fact that a dog of any breed can be dangerous. Furthermore, opponents of BSL have pointed out that those in charge of law enforcement do not always accurately identify breeds, and that the imposition of penalties on dogs merely as a result of breed identification can be unjust and arbitrary. i. In July of this year, after a nearly 2-year legal battle between the City Council of Belfast, Northern Ireland and dog owner Caroline Barnes, her American Bulldog / Labrador mix, Lennox, was euthanized for resembling a pit bull, which pose a threat to society. ii. As stated on latimes. om, â₠¬Å"The Belfast City Council declared Lennox had a severe personality disorder, but his owners, the Barnes family, said he was a well-handled American bulldog-Labrador cross. After measuring his legs and snout, dog wardens declared Lennox a â€Å"possible pit bull type† and in 2010 seized him under the UK’s dangerous dog act. † Dogs are only as good or bad as their owners III. How it affects owners A. Banning a specific breed punishes responsible dog owners who have well trained dogs of that breed, while irresponsible owners who seek a â€Å"dangerous dog† as a status symbol will simply choose a different breed. . According to the AKC, â€Å"this often leads to increased costs to the community, as many owners abandon their household pets at local shelters because they are no longer permitted to own them, or are unable to comply with the strict regulations imposed on them. † ii. In many cases, the owner must choose between relocating to a different to wn or getting rid of their dog. Many of these dogs end up being housed and/or euthanized at the shelters at the taxpayer’s expense. iii. As reported in Canada’s weekly newspaper, Macleans (2004), â€Å"Experts in canine control and behavior have all said the same thing.Breed-specific bans are reactionary and ineffectual because they don't address the root of the problem: high-risk owners. † According to Dr. Gary Landsberg, a Thornhill, Ont. , veterinarian and president of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists, â€Å"people who want to breed and/or own vicious dogs will simply turn to other breeds. † It only takes one rotten apple to spoil the whole bunch CONCLUSION Summary Statement So now you have a general idea of what Breed Specific Legislation is. Dog attacks and bites are real problems for communities and need to be addressed.Being informed on how BSL affects both dog & owner, innocent and guilty alike, has hopefully provided you with a fou ndation for further exploration. Concluding Remarks Is Breed Specific Legislation the right answer to keep communities safe from aggressive dogs? I honestly don’t know. But in closing I will say this. If those of you that resembled this man were actually detained, based solely on similar appearance, would your partners, families & friends accept it as a way to keep our community safe? You be the judge. Breed Specific Legislation INTRODUCTION Capture Attention Last week this man attacked and wounded another man at Mt. Scott Park, here in Portland, OR. Because of his actions I need all of the students with facial hair, dark shirts, tattoos and long hair to stand up. Effective immediately, all of you will be detained by local authorities because you have been deemed a threat to the safety of our community and the citizens who reside here. Significance/Relevance Breed Specific Legislation is not a new way to manage aggressive dogs.These changes in laws tend to happen after a highly publicized dog attack takes place. This type of legislation punishes the breed, not the deed. Credibility As a dog owner who spends everyday of his life with a breed of dog often found on breed ban lists, researching BSL is as much a part of my life as my dog, Lucky. Thesis Breed Specific Legislation aims to keep citizens safe by punishing innocent and guilty dogs alike. Preview Today, I’m going to share some information on wha t Breed Specific Legislation is, how it affects dogs and dog owners. The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way in which its animals are treated† – Gandhi BODY I. What is Breed Specific Legislation? A. Breed-specific legislation is the banning or restriction of the ownership of a dog solely based on the dog's breed regardless of the dog's personal history or temperament. i. BSL has been around for years, but according to www. dogsbite. org â€Å"in the last decade over 650 U. S. cities have enacted BSL as a preventative measure to reduce dog attacks and bites to protect citizens. B. Breed-specific legislation is based on the premise that certain breeds are inherently dangerous and that public safety can be accomplished by banning or restricting only those dogs. C. Currently, BSL focuses not on a specific breed, but rather a type of dog. That type, as most of you know, is referred to as the â€Å"pit-bull†. The term pit bull general ly refers to a Staffordshire bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, American pit bull terrier, or any dog that is a cross or mix of the aforementioned breeds.A pit bull may also mean any dog that has the appearance and physical characteristics that are substantially similar to the above listed breeds. Therefore, pit bull is a type of dog not a breed. Breed Specific Legislation exists, this is a fact. Facts create norms, but truth creates illumination. II. How it affects dogs A. Breed specific laws target and punish all dogs of a particular breed (the guilty ones as well as the innocent). Well-behaved dogs of that particular breed are seen, classified, and treated the same as the dogs that have in fact bitten or attacked individuals. i.According to an article run in the October edition (2009) of the Westword, a local publication in Denver, in 2006 â€Å"after a one-year moratorium Denver began to again enforce the pit bull ban in 2005, causing a 77 percent increase in the num ber of dogs impounded in Pit Bull Row. City records show that between 2005 and 2006,  1,454 pit bulls were put down, leading to the large pile-ups of dead dogs. † ii. Unfortunately, many of these dogs were deemed pit bulls simply because the animal control officer, shelter worker, dog trainer, politician, dog owner, police officer or newspaper says they are. B.BSL doesn’t acknowledge the fact that a dog of any breed can be dangerous. Furthermore, opponents of BSL have pointed out that those in charge of law enforcement do not always accurately identify breeds, and that the imposition of penalties on dogs merely as a result of breed identification can be unjust and arbitrary. i. In July of this year, after a nearly 2-year legal battle between the City Council of Belfast, Northern Ireland and dog owner Caroline Barnes, her American Bulldog / Labrador mix, Lennox, was euthanized for resembling a pit bull, which pose a threat to society. ii. As stated on latimes. om, â₠¬Å"The Belfast City Council declared Lennox had a severe personality disorder, but his owners, the Barnes family, said he was a well-handled American bulldog-Labrador cross. After measuring his legs and snout, dog wardens declared Lennox a â€Å"possible pit bull type† and in 2010 seized him under the UK’s dangerous dog act. † Dogs are only as good or bad as their owners III. How it affects owners A. Banning a specific breed punishes responsible dog owners who have well trained dogs of that breed, while irresponsible owners who seek a â€Å"dangerous dog† as a status symbol will simply choose a different breed. . According to the AKC, â€Å"this often leads to increased costs to the community, as many owners abandon their household pets at local shelters because they are no longer permitted to own them, or are unable to comply with the strict regulations imposed on them. † ii. In many cases, the owner must choose between relocating to a different to wn or getting rid of their dog. Many of these dogs end up being housed and/or euthanized at the shelters at the taxpayer’s expense. iii. As reported in Canada’s weekly newspaper, Macleans (2004), â€Å"Experts in canine control and behavior have all said the same thing.Breed-specific bans are reactionary and ineffectual because they don't address the root of the problem: high-risk owners. † According to Dr. Gary Landsberg, a Thornhill, Ont. , veterinarian and president of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists, â€Å"people who want to breed and/or own vicious dogs will simply turn to other breeds. † It only takes one rotten apple to spoil the whole bunch CONCLUSION Summary Statement So now you have a general idea of what Breed Specific Legislation is. Dog attacks and bites are real problems for communities and need to be addressed.Being informed on how BSL affects both dog & owner, innocent and guilty alike, has hopefully provided you with a fou ndation for further exploration. Concluding Remarks Is Breed Specific Legislation the right answer to keep communities safe from aggressive dogs? I honestly don’t know. But in closing I will say this. If those of you that resembled this man were actually detained, based solely on similar appearance, would your partners, families & friends accept it as a way to keep our community safe? You be the judge.

Generation Me Essay

In Twenges’ book she uses purpose in several ways. One of her main purposes is to describe how different generations have completely different views and moral standards. Twenge uses purpose to try and persuade the readers to believe that she has done the proper research for her book, and want the reader to feel like they can trust that what she is saying is the truth. In this book she doesn’t believe that there it is a problem between the generations just simply that there are distinct differences, and she tries to help the reader to discover why these differences occurred. In this book Twenge is really good at giving the audience background knowledge about herself and about the research that she did for the book. If you are familiar with the audience that you are writing to it is easier to persuade them, because you know there interests. I think that Twenge did a good job assessing her audience by asking herself questions like, who is going to read what I am going to discuss, what are their backgrounds, how much do the readers know about the topic I am writing about, and how much background information should I provide to my audience. I feel that when I read this book I can relate and easily understand what she is discussing. She is writing to a younger audience and not to Biochemists. I like the form of genre that Twenge uses in Generation Me. She breaks each chapter in to sub categories to put emphasis on specific topics which allow the reader to see what she thinks is important information. In this book she uses simple language with strong interests to get her point across. Structure is very important to the reader and the writer. Different types of magazines and novels have specific formats and structures of how they should be written. The style of writing is starting to change slowly over time just like fashion changes, but it will always be important to consider your audience when formatting the genre of your book.

Potential 2020 Republican Presidential Candidates

President Donald Trumps surprise win in 2016 was good news for many in the Republican Party. But the outsider non-politicians win did not make all conservative members of the GOP happy. Some preferred a standard-bearer for the party who fit a more traditional mold than the outspoken New York real estate developer and reality TV star. Others saw him as someone who doesnt actually hold the conservative values he espoused. Three Republicans already have indicated their interest in challenging Trump in the 2020 primary season, and pundits speculate that at least one more might join the race. Bill Weld Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Welds last run for office was as vice president on the Libertarian Party ticket, but the former Massachusetts governor re-joined the Republican Party to officially challenge President Trump in April 2019. Despite Trumps 90 percent approval rating among GOP voters, Weld insisted in a CNN interview that he can beat the sitting president. His strategy includes getting on the ballot in states that allow for crossover voting, meaning that people who traditionally vote for Democrats are allowed to vote in the Republican primary. Larry Hogan Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan is a moderate Republican who has said he would consider running against Trump in 2020 only if he thought he had a reasonable chance of winning. But polling even in his home state has shown that while Marylanders love him as their governor, Republicans favor Trump in a 2020 primary contest 68 percent to 24 percent. Hogan announced in June 1, 2019 he would not run, saying he would instead lead an advocacy group called An America United. John Kasich Former Ohio Gov. John Kasich already challenged Trump once, in the 2016 primaries, and came up short. The former Ohio governor was tenacious nonetheless and stayed in the fight until the bitter end. Kasich has continued his criticisms of the president as a cable news commentator. He  was rumored to be considering a 2020 campaign, but on May 31, 2019, he announced that he will not run, telling CNN, There is no path right now for me. I dont see a way to get there. Justin Amash Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan is a vocal Trump critic in the U.S. House of Representatives and began being talked about as a challenger to the president after he was the lone Republican in the House to join Democrats in calling for Trumps impeachment in May 2019. But the speculation was not over whether Amash would challenge Trump in the GOP primary. Instead, observers wondered whether the libertarian-minded Amash might indeed jump to the Libertarian party where he might steal enough electoral votes to be a spoiler in the general election. Others Other more conservative Republicans are not interested in challenging a sitting president, either because they support his policies or because they dont want to hurt their own political futures. Those likely waiting for the 2024 election include names like Vice President Mike Pence, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, former Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, or even former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.