Firm sees ultra-portable Mac from Apple by March

[AppleInsider]

Billing the subject its "Hot Topic of the Month," investment bank Piper Jaffray said Monday it believes there's a "high" likelihood Apple will announce an ultraportable Mac sometime in the next 4 to 6 months.

"The move could take place in the form of an smaller laptop and/or a tablet device using the iPhone's multi-touch technology," Sr. Analyst Gene Munster explained in a report issued to client investors. "Although we do not have firm evidence, either product would be a strategic extension of Apple's current technology base."

The ultraportable device could arrive in the form of an extension to the Cupertino-based firm's MacBook family of notebooks, Munster said, with a full keyboard and small screen of approximately 10 to 11 inches. Such an offering would be "a logical addition" to the Mac platform, he added, as any notebook with a more compact form-factor than the current 13-inch MacBooks would help Apple continue its share gains in the portable space, especially in Asia where UMPCs are more popular relative to other markets.

Alternatively, the analyst said, Apple is likely focusing a chunk of its R&D development efforts on the multi-touch technology used in the iPhone. He said an ultraportable product from this category would likely be a tablet device similar to, but slightly larger than, the iPhone.

"Such a device would likely have features and capabilities that the iPhone does not have, like data storage and file saving as well as document editing features," he wrote. "We believe Apple's multi-touch technology is slightly ahead of competitors using touch based input technology, and as such we expect Apple to leverage its multi-touch technology in future products."

In his note to investors, the PiperJaffray analyst also weighed in with some commentary on the impact of "iPhone hacking" on Apple's financials, which includes attempts by seasoned users to both install third-party applications and unlock the handsets from carrier AT&T.

A more robust set of applications would make the iPhone a slightly more attractive device, Munster agreed, but said for the majority of potential users this concept has "little to no impact" on their iPhone purchasing decision process, and therefore the issue has a minimal financial impact.

"Some of the more popular third-party applications that hackers are installing include an instant messaging application, a voice recording application, and several games," he wrote. "We believe Apple may eventually open the iPhone up to a limited amount of pre-approved applications that they would monetize via the iTunes Store, but there has been very little indication from the company that that is forthcoming."



Similarly, Munster also believes the financial impact of iPhone unlocking solutions on Apple is also marginal. While unlocking would imply that Apple is losing some of its AT&T revenue share, he believes the actual percentage is in the low single digits (at most 10 percent), and therefore is not of much significance to the company's bottom line.

"We are modeling for the [September quarter] revenue share from AT&T to be $7 million, so our estimate of unlocked iPhones would only have a [maximum] $700k impact on revenue in the quarter," he advised clients. "However, this does not account for the additional phones that are sold because they can be unlocked, which partially offsets the impact of the foregone shared revenue."

Munster maintained his Outperform rating on shares of Apple with a price target of $211.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[barney]

please let it be true this time!. my 12" powerbook is on it's last legs... when do you think they will anounce it officially? after new year? or hogmany as we call it

[pmjoe]

Someone else has probably suggested it before, but IMHO, Apple really missed out. They should've teamed with T-Mobile instead of AT&T and had the iPhone be part of T-Mobile HotSpot @Home. If Apple really wanted to shift the paradigm of telephony, supporting WiFi VOIP would've sent a real message to all the carriers. Trade less revenue for a much shorter exclusive agreement, and leave the competitors spinning with the need to support WiFi.

All that said, I'm sure Apple saw more money to be made with AT&T. I'd be shocked if Apple is losing any money to iPhone unlocking (specifically speaking about AT&T here, which Piper Jaffray was covering, not international). Anyone going to that trouble was never going to use an iPhone on AT&T in the first place. If anything, they are selling more phones because of this.

Conversely, I know of at least 30 iPhones that will likely not be sold because of the lack of 3rd party software development support. Even though Apple claims to not care about business/enterprise customers, lack of developer support is killing plenty of potential sales. One could argue Apple doesn't want these, but they are lost potential sales nevertheless.

Shouldn't the ultra-portable already be out by Piper Jaffray's predictions? Thank goodness it only ever sounds like they have one "analyst", a manager and an intern working on this at any given time. Any more people working on this quality if predictions would be a waste of time and money.

[Tailpipe]

For a company with the repuation of Piper Jaffray, I find their crystal ball gazing somewhat disconcerting for investors who tend to make decisions based on hard fact not unsubstantiated rumour. I for one wouldn't buy Apple stock based on this report.

So what of this persistent rumour about the new ultra-portable?

I think most Apple-afficionados would agree that its entire portable line-up is due for a refresh. It'd be nice to see the Mac Book Pros lose a few founds, gain a new key board and maintain the same screen sizes. The Mac Book line-up's white and black form factors seem to have dated much faster than the clean aluminium design of the Pro range, so a 13" screen in a thinner form factor with aluminium to complement the Mac Book Pro 15" and 17" would seem logical. That would give a range of three Mac Book Pros. I hope that all would utilise as much flash memory as possible to reduce thickness and boot times.

I am sure an update along these lines is definitely in the works. But is the re-vamped 13" essentially the new ultraportable?

If Apple is working on a fourth PC model, e.g. a 10" or 11" model with a microscopic thickness, then this is indeed important news. No one really seems to know the answer to this.

Personally, I'd prefer either a 13" or a 15" Mac Book Pro with integral DVD drive. If I wanted an ultaportable, which I do, then I'll wait for a 16 Gb iPhone with 3G.

[onlooker]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Sr. Analyst Gene Munster explained in a report issued to client investors. "Although we do not have firm evidence, either product would be a strategic extension of Apple's current technology base."

Yeah, like this guy has a clue. He reads this forum where some dude starts a thread saying he wants apple to make an ultra portable, and now we'll see one within 4-6 months? Don't believe the Hype.

[cnocbui]

Well my analysis indicates Apple will soon release a flying saucer. It will be about 12m across and...

I am sick of the rubbish coming from 'analysts' being reported as if it were news. It is just waffle and should not be reported on IMO. The members of this forum could do a better job of speculating.

AI used to be about inside leaks. If this keeps up you could as well have the I stand for Inane.

[rtdunham]

"We are modeling for the [September quarter] revenue share from AT&T to be $7 million, so our estimate of unlocked iPhones would only have a [maximum] $700k impact on revenue in the quarter," he advised clients. "However, this does not account for the additional phones that are sold because they can be unlocked, which partially offsets the impact of the foregone shared revenue."

Take a look at the math:

The $7 million of revenue from ATT would presumably fall right to the bottom line (profit).

Based on the premise that 10% of the phones might have been sold to be unlocked, that's 1/10th of approx 1 million phones = 100,000 phones sold and unlocked so not used on ATT and not generating ATT revenues to apple.

Does profit from sales offset that lost revenue? Well, consider:

That number of phones, multiplied by whatever apple makes (profit) on the sale of each phone, would be the offset. At $7 each/month, the lost att revenue (and profit) vs increased profits from added sales would be a wash. (Remember -- i think i've got this right -- apple books iPhone sales over 24 months, so 1/24 of a phone's sale price profit to apple would be booked in a given month. 24 x 7 = 168. So -- by this rough math -- to book $7 profit from the sale of a single phone in september, apple would have to make $168 on each iPhone sale, not including ATT revenue. And at that point it would be a wash.

We can all speculate on the rest: Are 1/10 really hacked and not used on ATT? Was that 1/10 sold only because the phones CAN be hacked, or would they have sold anyway? Is Munster's estimate of $7 million ATT rev for the month correct? The revenue from ATT will increase each month because there will be more iPhones using the service, but there will also have been more iPhones sold--generating additional (offsetting) profits to apple, but less than before because the phones have more recently been sold at a lower price. How will that affect the equation? Etc.

[zunx]

We need thousands for our University students and staff. But only if they are really ultra-small and ultra-portable. A handheld computer. Based on Intel Silverthorne. Full high quality wireless video with true NATIVE Keynote and PowerPoint presentations.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by onlooker

Yeah, like this guy has a clue. He reads this forum where some dude starts a thread saying he wants apple to make an ultra portable, and now we'll see one within 4-6 months? Don't believe the Hype.

I never surfed in my life.

[ThinkExpensive]

There's definitely a void in the product line, 13" is still not incredibly portable. There's going to be a gap device without an optical drive built in, or with the optical drive beneath the machine (we've seen the patent) that snaps open/shut. 10" screen is still usable, with a 'tablet mode' and a sort of psuedo-multitouch front row feature...

[TrevorD]

I think the vast majority of readers on here misunderstand the point of analysts. Analysts aren't meant to provide deep insight to people already in the know. They're meant to provide investment advice to people who don't have the time or the desire to do hours of research on every single one of their investments.

Think of a situation like this: You have a full-time job, you have a family, and you have hobbies. You also have investments in dozens of companies and are always on the lookout for new ones out of a field of thousands of eligible companies. Some of them may be in industries that interest you, but the vast majority are companies that hold no more interest than "they're making me money". Seriously, could you really bring yourself to spend several hours each day reading news and rumors about hundreds of companies in such exciting fields as textiles, dairy farming, and house cleaning? BTW, I'm talking about several hours on EACH of those companies each day. I didn't think so.

Sure, a big time investor might have a couple "pet" companies that they follow intently and personally. But the vast majority of their investments will be ones for which they can't spare the time. So they get an analyst to go out and do the research for them. An analyst shouldn't be expected to have drastically better access to information than a well-informed, constantly-searching-for-inside-info fan, because their sources are pretty much the same as those that get reflected here. They're not clairvoyant. They're just there to ANALYZE the information, figure out which stuff is both reliable and relevant from a financial standpoint, and report it to their customers.

As for why it's reported here? I guess it's to show what the rest of the world is seeing. If you don't like to read analyst reports, don't read them.

[SpamSandwich]

Providing reliable investment advice includes some form of speculation, since it is all speculation anyway, but giving clients shot-in-the-dark wild guesses on "ultra-portables" is a disservice to their clients. It can only artificially boost the speculative nature of AAPL stock until no such announcement is made, enabling the stockbrokers to sell at the new peak of the stock's price. What a scam. I wonder if many of these analysts are in bed with stockbrokers to artificially inflate and profit from dubious claims about the direction of AAPL.

[monstrosity]

Originally Posted by TrevorD

I think the vast majority of readers on here misunderstand the point of analysts. Analysts aren't meant to provide deep insight to people already in the know. They're meant to provide investment advice to people who don't have the time or the desire to do hours of research on every single one of their investments.

Think of a situation like this: You have a full-time job, you have a family, and you have hobbies. You also have investments in dozens of companies and are always on the lookout for new ones out of a field of thousands of eligible companies. Some of them may be in industries that interest you, but the vast majority are companies that hold no more interest than "they're making me money". Seriously, could you really bring yourself to spend several hours each day reading news and rumors about hundreds of companies in such exciting fields as textiles, dairy farming, and house cleaning? BTW, I'm talking about several hours on EACH of those companies each day. I didn't think so.

Sure, a big time investor might have a couple "pet" companies that they follow intently and personally. But the vast majority of their investments will be ones for which they can't spare the time. So they get an analyst to go out and do the research for them. An analyst shouldn't be expected to have drastically better access to information than a well-informed, constantly-searching-for-inside-info fan, because their sources are pretty much the same as those that get reflected here. They're not clairvoyant. They're just there to ANALYZE the information, figure out which stuff is both reliable and relevant from a financial standpoint, and report it to their customers.

As for why it's reported here? I guess it's to show what the rest of the world is seeing. If you don't like to read analyst reports, don't read them.

Thing is, I think why people moan about analysts, is that they are often way off the mark (they are getting better admittedly).
It would often seem like very little research is done, yet that is what they get paid to do.
If I had no clue about Apple, and I was investing, I would presume the analyst I trusted my money with had done his homework.
Numerous people on this forum are capable of better predictions than many of the so called pro's IMO.

[TrevorD]

Originally Posted by monstrosity

Thing is, I think why people moan about analysts, is that they are often way off the mark (they are getting better admittedly).
It would often seem like very little research is done, yet that is what they get paid to do.
If I had no clue about Apple, and I was investing, I would presume the analyst I trusted my money with had done his homework.
Numerous people on this forum are capable of better predictions than many of the so called pro's IMO.

I dunno... some might do better than the analysts, but I bet most wouldn't. If you think of all the pie-in-the-sky, out-of-left-field comments that come from so many people on these forums, the analysts (at least the better ones) do considerably better. We remember every time the analysts are even slightly off, but we ignore the many times posters are completely off because it's just forum banter. If we actually had to constantly make accurate forecasts and predictions in order to keep our jobs, do you honestly think many of the people here could do better? A small minority? Maybe. But most? No.

[ecking]

Kasper sell your articles to investment firms. Don't let them make money off your work. It painfully obvious that they read Appleinsider.

[ecking]

Also I really want a smaller notebook as well. That Fujitsu has a nice size, a 10.6" screen sounds perfect. If apple came out with one I'd sell my mbp and move up to a 24" imac (which I might do anyways) and get the ultraportable for it's ummm....portability.

[David Stevenson]

Originally Posted by monstrosity

Thing is, I think why people moan about analysts, is that they are often way off the mark (they are getting better admittedly).
It would often seem like very little research is done, yet that is what they get paid to do.
If I had no clue about Apple, and I was investing, I would presume the analyst I trusted my money with had done his homework.
Numerous people on this forum are capable of better predictions than many of the so called pro's IMO.

Since this is a thread about the Munster, I'd say he's the best analyst at "getting" Apple, and he does legwork (or an intern does) scoping out Apple and ATT stores to guestimate the sales rate of Apple iPhone and Macs.

That said, the main reason I read the analysts reports on this and other sites is to find out what's driving the market in AAPL. Whether I agree with what they say or not, it's interesting to know what they're saying.

[dfiler]

Once again I've got to chime in and ridicule Piper Jaffray. Recently they've reached a new low. They're now openly publishing rumors without any supporting evidence. In my opinion, Piper Jaffray analysts are as likely to be correct as any random member of this forum.

I honestly can't believe they're funding this kind of market "analysis" (speculation). Are investors really buying Gene Munster's baseless predictions? Something seems seriously amiss.

It seems that Sr. Analyst Gene Munster has completed the rumor circle and created a perpetual motion machine. Forum mongers continually rehash their desire for a sub-notebook. Analysts pick up on it and issue a report that a sub-notebook would make sense. Rumor sites like AI then run wild with the story. Circle complete.

Rumor sites are great but there isn't a need to sensationalize in this manner. A more accurate headline would have been: "Piper Jaffray: Mac Ultra-Portable Makes Sense"

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by ecking

Kasper sell your articles to investment firms. Don't let them make money off your work. It painfully obvious that they read Appleinsider.

Hey ecking does your post count get reset when you are banned? Just curious.

[rogue68]

Why are so many people insistent on seeing the ultra-portable and slimmed down Macbooks and Macbook Pros as one and the same thing?

Does no one else remember the delivery of 13" lcd screens just before the last MBPs were rolled out?

I can see no reason why a 13' MBP and a separate ultra-portable shouldn't sell equally well for different purposes.

[Kolchak]

Ireland, would you mind not linking oversize graphics all the time? They break the forum page layout if people have browser windows less than 1200 pixels wide.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by Kolchak

Ireland, would you mind not linking oversize graphics all the time? They break the forum page layout if people have browser windows less than 1200 pixels wide.

Ok I'll lay off it a bit.

[ecking]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Hey ecking does your post count get reset when you are banned? Just curious.

You know what, I have no idea. I doubt it but I didn't check, they should, I think it'd be funny.

[monstrosity]

Originally Posted by TrevorD

I dunno... some might do better than the analysts, but I bet most wouldn't. If you think of all the pie-in-the-sky, out-of-left-field comments that come from so many people on these forums, the analysts (at least the better ones) do considerably better. We remember every time the analysts are even slightly off, but we ignore the many times posters are completely off because it's just forum banter. If we actually had to constantly make accurate forecasts and predictions in order to keep our jobs, do you honestly think many of the people here could do better? A small minority? Maybe. But most? No.

I agree, it is a small minority, but I still expect the experts to equal or surpass minority with insight on this site. I expect a professional to have particular flair in his/her work. But saying that
I have kind of learnt over the years that there are very few people who live up to the title of being 'experts' in their field. As I learn about each subject I often find the people I once revered as experts are often just blaggers!

[monstrosity]

Originally Posted by David Stevenson

Since this is a thread about the Munster, I'd say he's the best analyst at "getting" Apple, and he does legwork (or an intern does) scoping out Apple and ATT stores to guestimate the sales rate of Apple iPhone and Macs.

That said, the main reason I read the analysts reports on this and other sites is to find out what's driving the market in AAPL. Whether I agree with what they say or not, it's interesting to know what they're saying.

I wasnt trying to get at munster in particular, I just feel that most analysts (in general) are oblivious to the larger picture. And in particular they lack understanding that Apple is not an average company that fits the 'standard model' they think every company should behave like.

[onlooker]

Fuck do I hate these stupid iPhone tablet mockups. Talk about ridiculous. Every time I see one I just can't imagine how Apple could be silly enough to waste time and money on another 1% market niche product when they should be developing and selling products that millions would appreciate that their users are already asking for. The minority group that wants that BIG iPhone is a small minority even within their own existing users.

[backtomac]

Originally Posted by dfiler

Once again I've got to chime in and ridicule Piper Jaffray. Recently they've reached a new low. They're now openly publishing rumors without any supporting evidence. In my opinion, Piper Jaffray analysts are as likely to be correct as any random member of this forum.

I honestly can't believe they're funding this kind of market "analysis" (speculation). Are investors really buying Gene Munster's baseless predictions? Something seems seriously amiss.

It seems that Sr. Analyst Gene Munster has completed the rumor circle and created a perpetual motion machine. Forum mongers continually rehash their desire for a sub-notebook. Analysts pick up on it and issue a report that a sub-notebook would make sense. Rumor sites like AI then run wild with the story. Circle complete.

Rumor sites are great but there isn't a need to sensationalize in this manner. A more accurate headline would have been: "Piper Jaffray: Mac Ultra-Portable Makes Sense"

Yeah, Gene Munster is starting to look like the new Henry Blodget.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by onlooker

Fuck do I hate these stupid iPhone tablet mockups. Talk about ridiculous. Every time I see one I just can't imagine how Apple could be silly enough to waste time and money on another 1% market niche product when they should be developing and selling products that millions would appreciate that their users are already asking for. The minority group that wants that BIG iPhone is a small minority even within their own existing users.

If Apple just concentrated on products their users already want, the iPod wouldn't exist and the iPhone wouldn't either for that matter. What you call a niche is a half-assed attempt to do something, that was never done correctly to begin with. When the iPod came out first the whole Apple community were united against it, Apple proved them wrong.

I know this looks like a bigger iPhone, and in a way it is, but in a way it's not too. The iPhone was designed to be a better phone, from the ground up it was looked at from a different perspective than basically all other phones, you can see the love (and thought) gone into the product. They will take the idea of the iPhone to the Mac, not just make the iPhone bigger. The iPhone is a phone, this will be looked at from an R&D, usability and marketing point of view as a Mac. It's a way of bringing natural input (i.e. real touch) to the Mac. Making this a convertible, as you see it, I think is missing the point I'm trying to make here. The way I see it, this will be a revolution. Making it a convertible is like shying away from that fact. If Apple are to take on something as big as this, they simple must go the whole way, and I think they would look at it like that.

Asking Apple to give a product like this a real keyboard, is like Peter Rojas asking Apple to give the next iPhone a real keypad - it's simply missing the whole point of the product.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think this would be the start of the end for real keyboards, even for Apple, but I just don't think this product will have, or will need one.

[BMWintoxication]

i've been waiting and waiting and waiting..

i don't care what spec it has, as long as it is an ultra portabe, and runs OSX.

[onlooker]

Originally Posted by Ireland

If Apple just concentrated on products their users already want, the iPod wouldn't exist and the iPhone wouldn't either for that matter. What you call a niche is a half-assed attempt to do something, that was never done correctly to begin with. When the iPod came out first the whole Apple community were united against it, Apple proved them wrong.

I know this looks like a bigger iPhone, and in a way it is, but in a way it's not too. The iPhone was designed to be a better phone, from the ground up it was looked at from a different perspective than basically all other phones, you can see the love (and thought) gone into the product. They will take the idea of the iPhone to the Mac, not just make the iPhone bigger. The iPhone is a phone, this will be looked at from an R&D, usability and marketing point of view as a Mac. It's a way of bringing natural input (i.e. real touch) to the Mac. Making this a convertible, as you see it, I think is missing the point I'm trying to make here. The way I see it, this will be a revolution. Making it a convertible is like shying away from that fact. If Apple are to take on something as big as this, they simple must go the whole way, and I think they would look at it like that.

Asking Apple to give a product like this a real keyboard, is like Peter Rojas asking Apple to give the next iPhone a real keypad - it's simply missing the whole point of the product.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think this would be the start of the end for real keyboards, even for Apple, but I just don't think this product will have, or will need one.

The iPhone not having a keyboard is essential for it's feature set. It doesn't have applications that absolutely need the view at the same as the keypad, and even at times, like making posts in a forum, it is already a pain in the ass, but for something that simple it's not that big of a deal.
For reasons already explained to you guys over and over again in earlier posts, and in other threads, making a real computer without a keyboard is a totally stupid idea.
For Apple just to make it because of people thinking if they don't they didn't "go the whole way" is senseless, and that is what is half-assed. Making something un-user friendly just to take away the keyboard and touch your viewport is ridiculous. It can't be any more obvious than it is by just thinking about on your own for less than a minute. It's self defeating. It makes the product extremely difficult to use.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by onlooker

The iPhone not having a keyboard is essential for it's feature set.

Please. We all know the reasons the iPhone doesn't have a keyboard. One, Apple had reached a point technically, whereby they could make a software keypad that was a good enough counterpart to a real one, and two, the fact that the keyboard takes up zero physical space (and weight). It's about conserving space in the end. Something which an ultra-portable would need too. For an ultra-portable, smaller, thinner and lighter is better, it's time to take that mantra to the extreme.

[Kolchak]

I'd pay good money for an ultra-ultra-portable. How about an iPhone-like (maybe twice as thick) form factor, but with a good ULV Core Solo or Core Duo processor and the 160GB HD from the latest iPod Classic. Good enough for almost everything you'd want to use on the go, although not a Photoshop powerhouse. Maybe step it down to 500MHz or so and disable one core during portable use to conserve battery power. But the real fun comes when you plug it into a dock, which could add USB and FireWire ports, a 500GB or larger hard drive, external video up to 1920x1200, bump CPU back to full speed and re-enable second core, etc. Voila, instant desktop machine! Better yet, let it lay down flat on the desk when docked and use the MultiTouch screen as a pointing and gestural control device a la iGesture.

Now that's what I call smaller, thinner and lighter to the extreme. Mmmmm, I love pie in the sky!

Edit: Oh, I forgot. It should run full Mac OS X rather than the iPhone version.