Reasons not to buy an iPhone… Rich lawyers get richer… Australian directors more worker friendly
Friday, September 14, 2007/
TechRepublic has engaged in some serious bubble bursting with this list of five reasons not to buy an iPhone:
1. It costs too much: At $US399 for an 8GB device, buying an iPhone is going to take a fair bit of pocket change.
2. User-unfriendly battery: The user can’t remove and replace the iPhone’s battery, so when the iPhone’s battery dies you have to send it back to Apple and pay to get a new one. Time consuming and annoying.
3. Where’s the keyboard? Apple bucked the trend when it decided to do away with a physical keyboard. Sure, the touchscreen looks cool, but how usable is it?
4. Stuck with one mobile service provider: Most phones are independent of service providers, allowing you to pick the handset you want and then shop around for the best plan. In the US the iPhone can only be used through AT&T, and will be dedicated to a single network when released in Australia too.
5. iTune required to sync: Apple assumes that everyone has iTunes installed on their computers, but many Windows users don’t. Want to sync to your work computer but you’re not allowed to install music programs like iTunes on it? Too bad.
Lawyers have had one of the busiest years of the past 20, thanks to the private equity boom. And the good times are being reflected in their pay packets.
A few partners in big firms are now earning $1.7 million, some earn $1.5 million and more earn about $1.3 million. The bulk of equity partners at the big six firms – Mallesons, Clayton Utz, Baker & McKenzie, Corrs, Allens Arthur Robinson and Freehills – now earn more than $1 million, according to The Australian Financial Review’s annual survey.
The most profitable law firm is Clayton Utz, with an estimated profit margin of 46%. Corrs follows on 45% and Mallesons on 43%.
Directors of Australian companies are more likely to believe serving their company means giving equal weight to all stakeholders in the company than their counterparts in the US, a new Melbourne University study reveals.
According to the study of 400 company directors, four out of 10 Australian company directors say they put shareholders first in their decision making, with the majority saying they weigh the interests of all company shareholders equally.
By contrast, studies have found that around eight out of 10 directors in the US rank shareholders ahead of all other stakeholders, including employees, while in Japan studies have shown employees to be ranked higher over other stakeholder groups.
There has been a debate about whether the corporations law needs to be widened to allow directors to take into account interests beyond those of shareholders, but the overwhelming majority of respondents said they believed the law as it currently stands allows them to do that.