It could indicate that they are going to do an across the board price reduction to increase the velocity of product sales and grow their already spectacular lead. Just imagine.
That would be awesome! But only assuming they could keep up with production across the board to sell bazillions more of everything!! Price cuts without being able to keep up with demand would be like giving money away... Since the original article talked about a 12% drop in sequential sales, not just a drop in margins, this doesn't appear to fit (as appealing as it is).
Edit: wow! Cloudgazer said it a lot faster and much more succinctly. That's what I get for trying to post while putting the kids to bed...
This article was specifically mentioning iPhone product transition. Why do people jumped and talk about ipad, MBP etc? iPhone 5. Get it?
Obviously, with a product transition, coupled with already known OS update will only mean material change and its telephony technology. Liquidmetal and dual band is a good example and so is PAYG/low cost and pro (correction, Apple don't do pro anymore. I mean mainstream) iPhones. CPU speed or pixel size or camera resolution are not categorised as a (major) product transition.
The mention in the conference call about the "Future product transition" that Apple could not talk about at the current time had no reference of having to do with the iPhone.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors, shifting from Intel to ARM/System-on-a-chip processors such as the A6, A7, and A8. Apple wants control of the whole ecosystem of their machines and does not want to rely on Intel processors, which are pricey for Apple right now, and Apple cannot control. Look forward to future Macs in the next few years shifting to ARM processors across the line, starting with MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros, eventually making their way to desktops.
Also, I have talked to a few friends who agree that Apple will be discontinuing the Mac Pro in a very short time (Mac Pro towers). Of all Apple revenue for the last quarter, Mac sales made up only 18%. Of that 18% it was disclosed that the majority of that was MacBook Pro sales. Of desktops, over 95% of those sales are iMacs. Of Apple's computer sales, the Mac Pro probably makes up less than one-tenth of one percent. That is pretty low, and the Mac Pro is pretty expensive to produce. Apple has already shown it is shifting away from the Pro market and most of their focus now is on iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro. Not very much concern on the Mac Pro and the high end Apple workstation users/market. The Mac Pro is on the way out, it could be one year or two years, but it is imminent.
The mention in the conference call about the "Future product transition" that Apple could not talk about at the current time had no reference of having to do with the iPhone.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors .....
Also, ..... Apple will be discontinuing the Mac Pro .....
This is correct, the discussion was about a "downtick in revenue guidance". This phrase was used in this way in 2008, before the introduction of the "unibody" MacBooks, because Apple had to make a huge investment in the production facilities.
Shifting to the manufacture of their own processors would be such an expensive "transition". Introducing a new product, such as a new iPhone, or even discontinuing an old product, would not be a "transition".
So look out for Apple building products in a new way. Their own chips, or using Liquid Metal or carbon fibre, for example.
Could it not also be an iPod 'future product transition'?
No.
The iPod is about 5% of their total revenue. A product transition in the iPod product line would not be described as "major" anymore.
When Apple says "major product ___," the most reasonable assumption is that they are talking about the iPhone. The phone is 47% of their total revenue and has the largest gross margin of all of their product families.
Apple blew doors on revenue and EPS, and it was mostly due to the blowout quarter in iPhone sales.
The iPod is about 5% of their total revenue. A product transition in the iPod product line would not be described as "major" anymore.
Yes, maybe...
But what bothers me is the Mac Pro (flagship tower computer) makes up only about one-tenth of one percent (or even less) of total revenue. I am very worried that we will see Apple phase out Mac Pro very soon since the emphasis lately has been all consumer-ish gadgets and not serious Mac stuff like the Mac Pro and their Pro/high-end arena.
But what bothers me is the Mac Pro (flagship tower computer) makes up only about one-tenth of one percent (or even less) of total revenue. I am very worried that we will see Apple phase out Mac Pro very soon since the emphasis lately has been all consumer-ish gadgets and not serious Mac stuff like the Mac Pro and their Pro/high-end arena.
Be not afraid. Seriously. The Mac Pro is extremely low maintenance for Apple in terms of engineering - and it serves the one group of power users Apple profoundly cares about - developers, many of them working for Apple.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors, shifting from Intel to ARM/System-on-a-chip processors such as the A6, A7, and A8. Apple wants control of the whole ecosystem of their machines and does not want to rely on Intel processors, which are pricey for Apple right now, and Apple cannot control. Look forward to future Macs in the next few years shifting to ARM processors across the line, starting with MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros, eventually making their way to desktops.
While it could conceivably happen it would happen at the same time as a significant OS revision because the OS would require full ARM/Intel emulation, and they only just ripped out Rosetta. Since Lion is getting released tomorrow and doesn't contain any such thing, I think we can be fairly sure that this isn't coming in the next 3 months. It probably won't come even in the next few years, though Apple could well use the possibility as leverage over Intel.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors, shifting from Intel to ARM/System-on-a-chip processors such as the A6, A7, and A8. Apple wants control of the whole ecosystem of their machines and does not want to rely on Intel processors, which are pricey for Apple right now, and Apple cannot control. Look forward to future Macs in the next few years shifting to ARM processors across the line, starting with MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros, eventually making their way to desktops.
I guess my biggest question here is the performance comparison between the latest Intel processors and the latest ARM processors. I thought that the Intel processors were far and away much more powerful. Maybe I'm wrong here, and maybe that gap is closing. I do find it rather hard to believe though.
Now, this may very well be practical and the right move for the MB Air products, but I don't really see this on the MB Pro and desktops. The Air is designed more as a general purpose, lower end product and taking a hit in CPU performance probably wouldn't be detrimental. It does seem odd timing for that however if I'm right about the Intel processors being much faster that the Airs would take a significant step forward to the i-series processors and then a potential step back to the ARM processors.
If they do that I will hate them forever, even as I go and buy another MBP
I don't think it's likely though, they simply won't have the supply yet, and the panels will make a bigger difference to sales in the iPad market than the laptop market. It's going to be challenging enough producing 10" panels at that dpi.
Based on the the natural distance for using a 17" notebook compared to a phone.... If I hold my phone at natural distance, in landscape, in front of a 17" MPB at its natural distance, then the MPB is about 2.5 times the angular width of the phone. 960x2.5 = 2400. So I guess a 17" 2560 by 1440 display would qualify as retina.
Comments
It could indicate that they are going to do an across the board price reduction to increase the velocity of product sales and grow their already spectacular lead. Just imagine.
That would be awesome! But only assuming they could keep up with production across the board to sell bazillions more of everything!! Price cuts without being able to keep up with demand would be like giving money away... Since the original article talked about a 12% drop in sequential sales, not just a drop in margins, this doesn't appear to fit (as appealing as it is).
Edit: wow! Cloudgazer said it a lot faster and much more succinctly. That's what I get for trying to post while putting the kids to bed...
Edit: wow! Cloudgazer said it a lot faster and much more succinctly. That's what I get for trying to post while putting the kids to bed...
Your explanation was clearer though, mine was just shorter
Your explanation was clearer though, mine was just shorter
Different parenting styles:
Cloudgazer: Because I said so!
Baglejoy: Because I am your dad and when I tell you to go to bed it's because it is bed time. End of discussion.
Obviously, with a product transition, coupled with already known OS update will only mean material change and its telephony technology. Liquidmetal and dual band is a good example and so is PAYG/low cost and pro (correction, Apple don't do pro anymore. I mean mainstream) iPhones. CPU speed or pixel size or camera resolution are not categorised as a (major) product transition.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors, shifting from Intel to ARM/System-on-a-chip processors such as the A6, A7, and A8. Apple wants control of the whole ecosystem of their machines and does not want to rely on Intel processors, which are pricey for Apple right now, and Apple cannot control. Look forward to future Macs in the next few years shifting to ARM processors across the line, starting with MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros, eventually making their way to desktops.
Also, I have talked to a few friends who agree that Apple will be discontinuing the Mac Pro in a very short time (Mac Pro towers). Of all Apple revenue for the last quarter, Mac sales made up only 18%. Of that 18% it was disclosed that the majority of that was MacBook Pro sales. Of desktops, over 95% of those sales are iMacs. Of Apple's computer sales, the Mac Pro probably makes up less than one-tenth of one percent. That is pretty low, and the Mac Pro is pretty expensive to produce. Apple has already shown it is shifting away from the Pro market and most of their focus now is on iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro. Not very much concern on the Mac Pro and the high end Apple workstation users/market. The Mac Pro is on the way out, it could be one year or two years, but it is imminent.
- An iPad
- A replacement for the Mac Pro.
- A replacement for the Mini
- Apple TVs.
- High resolution screens on the MBP.
- Dropping of the non iOS based iPods
The automatic assumption that they are talking iPhone here is misplaced. For one thing a new iPhone really isn't a transition.The mention in the conference call about the "Future product transition" that Apple could not talk about at the current time had no reference of having to do with the iPhone.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors .....
Also, ..... Apple will be discontinuing the Mac Pro .....
This is correct, the discussion was about a "downtick in revenue guidance". This phrase was used in this way in 2008, before the introduction of the "unibody" MacBooks, because Apple had to make a huge investment in the production facilities.
Shifting to the manufacture of their own processors would be such an expensive "transition". Introducing a new product, such as a new iPhone, or even discontinuing an old product, would not be a "transition".
So look out for Apple building products in a new way. Their own chips, or using Liquid Metal or carbon fibre, for example.
Could it not also be an iPod 'future product transition'?
No.
The iPod is about 5% of their total revenue. A product transition in the iPod product line would not be described as "major" anymore.
When Apple says "major product ___," the most reasonable assumption is that they are talking about the iPhone. The phone is 47% of their total revenue and has the largest gross margin of all of their product families.
Apple blew doors on revenue and EPS, and it was mostly due to the blowout quarter in iPhone sales.
No.
The iPod is about 5% of their total revenue. A product transition in the iPod product line would not be described as "major" anymore.
Yes, maybe...
But what bothers me is the Mac Pro (flagship tower computer) makes up only about one-tenth of one percent (or even less) of total revenue. I am very worried that we will see Apple phase out Mac Pro very soon since the emphasis lately has been all consumer-ish gadgets and not serious Mac stuff like the Mac Pro and their Pro/high-end arena.
Yes, maybe...
But what bothers me is the Mac Pro (flagship tower computer) makes up only about one-tenth of one percent (or even less) of total revenue. I am very worried that we will see Apple phase out Mac Pro very soon since the emphasis lately has been all consumer-ish gadgets and not serious Mac stuff like the Mac Pro and their Pro/high-end arena.
Be not afraid. Seriously. The Mac Pro is extremely low maintenance for Apple in terms of engineering - and it serves the one group of power users Apple profoundly cares about - developers, many of them working for Apple.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors, shifting from Intel to ARM/System-on-a-chip processors such as the A6, A7, and A8. Apple wants control of the whole ecosystem of their machines and does not want to rely on Intel processors, which are pricey for Apple right now, and Apple cannot control. Look forward to future Macs in the next few years shifting to ARM processors across the line, starting with MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros, eventually making their way to desktops.
While it could conceivably happen it would happen at the same time as a significant OS revision because the OS would require full ARM/Intel emulation, and they only just ripped out Rosetta. Since Lion is getting released tomorrow and doesn't contain any such thing, I think we can be fairly sure that this isn't coming in the next 3 months. It probably won't come even in the next few years, though Apple could well use the possibility as leverage over Intel.
How about an iOSbook for education? Basically, an iPad2 with a larger display and a keyboard...
Apple already has that. It's called the MacBook Air.
I, personally believe the transition refers to a shift in Apple's computer processors, shifting from Intel to ARM/System-on-a-chip processors such as the A6, A7, and A8. Apple wants control of the whole ecosystem of their machines and does not want to rely on Intel processors, which are pricey for Apple right now, and Apple cannot control. Look forward to future Macs in the next few years shifting to ARM processors across the line, starting with MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros, eventually making their way to desktops.
I guess my biggest question here is the performance comparison between the latest Intel processors and the latest ARM processors. I thought that the Intel processors were far and away much more powerful. Maybe I'm wrong here, and maybe that gap is closing. I do find it rather hard to believe though.
Now, this may very well be practical and the right move for the MB Air products, but I don't really see this on the MB Pro and desktops. The Air is designed more as a general purpose, lower end product and taking a hit in CPU performance probably wouldn't be detrimental. It does seem odd timing for that however if I'm right about the Intel processors being much faster that the Airs would take a significant step forward to the i-series processors and then a potential step back to the ARM processors.
If they do that I will hate them forever, even as I go and buy another MBP
I don't think it's likely though, they simply won't have the supply yet, and the panels will make a bigger difference to sales in the iPad market than the laptop market. It's going to be challenging enough producing 10" panels at that dpi.
Based on the the natural distance for using a 17" notebook compared to a phone.... If I hold my phone at natural distance, in landscape, in front of a 17" MPB at its natural distance, then the MPB is about 2.5 times the angular width of the phone. 960x2.5 = 2400. So I guess a 17" 2560 by 1440 display would qualify as retina.