Man what a crappy interview. Businessweek has rare access to 3 apple execs and most of the article is about Android. :rolleyes:
They keep misinterpreting stats too. At one point, they say:
"According to market researcher IDC, Android runs on nearly 80 percent of the world’s smartphones and nearly two-thirds of its tablets."
Google has activated 1 billion units, Apple has sold over 650 million (they say it'll be over 700m soon), the recent worldwide sales share may be 80% but the amount of active Android devices is not 80% of the total. 40% of the Google ones run Android 2.x. Reporters keep making out like the usage stats conflict with the marketshare and they really don't. Apple is selling more premium devices than anyone else. They are only 2nd in overall volume to Samsung and Samsung makes up half of all Android devices.
The point that gets raised about Android volume eventually becoming a tipping point for developer support has some merit but it ignores the fact that relative volume isn't as big a factor as absolute volume here. If a developer targets iOS, they still have a potential audience of 700 million (give or take some broken devices). Even if Android tops 2 billion and outnumbers iOS 2:1 in say 3 years, the sheer volume of iOS users is still really compelling to make iOS a priority, especially considering the portion of iOS models that are flagship models.
I love it when I here Apple is "Greedy" or "Apple Tax"
It is not that Apple is over priced it is that the competition is in a race to the bottom for 5% profit or less per unit.
Apple does not fall for the pressure of the competition to compete for "junk".
I here how people talking about there 3rd or 4th generation back device like the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4s with the latest iOS 7 on said device and how happy they are.
Do you hear that about Samsung, Black Berry or HTC?
That alone speaks VOLUMES about the quality of Apple devices.
So when fan boys are ripping Apple for not producing a device designed to last 2 years or less take into account they are only doing so because the product they use on a daily basis is no where to quality level that Apple produces.
I believe you can't copy quality because if you are copying some other companies product in the first place you already have a lack of innovation or creativity and are always following and never leading nor will you ever.
Look at all phones in the last 4-5 years, 75% of all the true inovation has come from Apple and the 5s in no different with real useable fingerprint tech and complete 64bit.
Now with in the next 6 months every MFG and Android will offer the same specs but again it will not be as fluid and polished like Apple products because..... they will be copying instead of leading.
Done with my rant, thanks for reading...flame away
The shuffle is cheap because it uses less materials and doesn't have any kind of screen on it, not because they cheaped out on engineering, R&D, design, and materials that aren't as durable as other iPod models. For how small it is, though it really isn't that "cheap."
It's super-cheap for an iPod though. Apple reduced the concept in terms of complexity rather than quality.
Reducing the complexity of an iPhone is a much harder task. People expects the iPhone to do so much more than make phone calls. Perhaps the iPhone 5c is as far as it's possible to go without reducing quality.
Does anyone else read quotes from these execs in the execs voice? Lol. Everytime I read Jony, he speaks it in my mind.
Good for them.
He made a really good point about touch id and not just adding a bunch of features that may or may not work great just so you can boast about a bigger features list. I have yet to come across a review of the 5S that said touch id didn't work for them. Most reviews said it was flawless after set up. Then you have Samsung releasing a clunky watch with a laggy UI and barely one day battery life. Just because they wanted to beat Apple and Google to the punch. Not because the market is crying out for a smartwatch,
I agree with you on 5C pricing but at least we're now getting some clarity from Cook. Apple is content with competing in the higher end of the market. We'll see if this continues to be a winning strategy.
I'm not even sure this is the strategy. We have to remember the prices that people are upset over are the list prices for off contract phones. It is already clear that some carries are being very aggressive with the marketing of these phones.
My guess is Cook figures its impossible to win in a market where its all about price.
And he would be right! You can't win in a market where there are no profits but you also can't win if your profits are so high that they seem greedy. As to the low end of the market, well yeah stay out of the no profit zone. However there is a vast middle ground that Apple can address.
For me the greatest problem I see for the 5s is not its cost per say as it is what you get for that money. Here I'm specifically thinking flash memory which is quickly becoming marginal in capacity and too high in price on the iPhones. Really 32 GB should be the minimal configuration on a flag ship model. The system and the common apps demands it.
But I think more than ever Apple will need to demonstrate its value, that its products are worth paying more for. Especially when you have companies that are willing to subsidize hardware in order to get eyeballs.
This is sorta of what I was getting at, iPhones and even Apples tablets look like great values now. There certainly is little real competition if you look at user acceptance. How long that will go on is unknown. In any event if you look at iPad Mini it really is a low cost machine and competes well at the lower end of the market even if people try to pan it as expensive.
The other thing here is that Apples profit off each iPhone or iPad is on going as it gains significant income from the ecosystem. Apple has a lot more flexibility in pricing thus the various promotions through the telcos. However I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple become more competitive through seasonal promotions like Black Friday sales. If they ship an extra 500,000 during a Black Friday sale it might affect margins a bit but they get much of that back a couple days later when everybody goes to the App Store. I can see Apples attitude slowly changing about pricing, they just have no need to rush right now.
Buying the iPhone 5C instead of 5S is like buying last year MacBook Air or Pro for only $100-$200 cheaper than this year model. And with a plastic case instead of aluminum. Would you buy it? Of course not!
It's super-cheap for an iPod though. Apple reduced the concept in terms of complexity rather than quality.
Reducing the complexity of an iPhone is a much harder task. People expects the iPhone to do so much more than make phone calls. Perhaps the iPhone 5c is as far as it's possible to go without reducing quality.
Apple could reduce it more without sacrificing quality. However, Apple would have to significantly reduce functionality. So, the question becomes is it worth it for Apple to do that? Probably not. It was with music because there are plenty of people who want just a small lightweight music player, but how many people really want a phone that just makes phone calls and nothing more? I doubt very many.
do you really think it cost $150 less to make a plastic case the quality of the 5C than a metal case? no way.
At $500 the margins would be hit HARD. At $550 it gives Apple the flexability to lower the price for certain markets and keep it high in other markets and STILL retain the premium image.
No, I don't think switching to a plastic case would save $150. But using last years tech in a plastic case would certainly be $150 cheaper if not more.
I feel that Apple is being unnecessarily greedy with the iPhone 5C.
Buying the iPhone 5C instead of 5S is like buying last year MacBook Air or Pro for only $100-$200 cheaper than this year model. And with a plastic case instead of aluminum. Would you buy it? Of course not!
I'm not even sure this is the strategy. We have to remember the prices that people are upset over are the list prices for off contract phones. It is already clear that some carries are being very aggressive with the marketing of these phones.
And he would be right! You can't win in a market where there are no profits but you also can't win if your profits are so high that they seem greedy. As to the low end of the market, well yeah stay out of the no profit zone. However there is a vast middle ground that Apple can address.
For me the greatest problem I see for the 5s is not its cost per say as it is what you get for that money. Here I'm specifically thinking flash memory which is quickly becoming marginal in capacity and too high in price on the iPhones. Really 32 GB should be the minimal configuration on a flag ship model. The system and the common apps demands it.
This is sorta of what I was getting at, iPhones and even Apples tablets look like great values now. There certainly is little real competition if you look at user acceptance. How long that will go on is unknown. In any event if you look at iPad Mini it really is a low cost machine and competes well at the lower end of the market even if people try to pan it as expensive.
The other thing here is that Apples profit off each iPhone or iPad is on going as it gains significant income from the ecosystem. Apple has a lot more flexibility in pricing thus the various promotions through the telcos. However I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple become more competitive through seasonal promotions like Black Friday sales. If they ship an extra 500,000 during a Black Friday sale it might affect margins a bit but they get much of that back a couple days later when everybody goes to the App Store. I can see Apples attitude slowly changing about pricing, they just have no need to rush right now.
All valid points. Next few years will certainly be interesting.
Absolutely. "We're not in the junk business." Ram this down the throat of every stupid banalyst who's whining that Apple isn't contesting the crap segments of the smartphone market. Apple never has and never ever will let their name be associated with unmitigated pieces of shit products. That's not how they came to be so successful and profitable.
Comments
Nice!
They keep misinterpreting stats too. At one point, they say:
"According to market researcher IDC, Android runs on nearly 80 percent of the world’s smartphones and nearly two-thirds of its tablets."
Google has activated 1 billion units, Apple has sold over 650 million (they say it'll be over 700m soon), the recent worldwide sales share may be 80% but the amount of active Android devices is not 80% of the total. 40% of the Google ones run Android 2.x. Reporters keep making out like the usage stats conflict with the marketshare and they really don't. Apple is selling more premium devices than anyone else. They are only 2nd in overall volume to Samsung and Samsung makes up half of all Android devices.
The point that gets raised about Android volume eventually becoming a tipping point for developer support has some merit but it ignores the fact that relative volume isn't as big a factor as absolute volume here. If a developer targets iOS, they still have a potential audience of 700 million (give or take some broken devices). Even if Android tops 2 billion and outnumbers iOS 2:1 in say 3 years, the sheer volume of iOS users is still really compelling to make iOS a priority, especially considering the portion of iOS models that are flagship models.
I love it when I here Apple is "Greedy" or "Apple Tax"
It is not that Apple is over priced it is that the competition is in a race to the bottom for 5% profit or less per unit.
Apple does not fall for the pressure of the competition to compete for "junk".
I here how people talking about there 3rd or 4th generation back device like the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4s with the latest iOS 7 on said device and how happy they are.
Do you hear that about Samsung, Black Berry or HTC?
That alone speaks VOLUMES about the quality of Apple devices.
So when fan boys are ripping Apple for not producing a device designed to last 2 years or less take into account they are only doing so because the product they use on a daily basis is no where to quality level that Apple produces.
I believe you can't copy quality because if you are copying some other companies product in the first place you already have a lack of innovation or creativity and are always following and never leading nor will you ever.
Look at all phones in the last 4-5 years, 75% of all the true inovation has come from Apple and the 5s in no different with real useable fingerprint tech and complete 64bit.
Now with in the next 6 months every MFG and Android will offer the same specs but again it will not be as fluid and polished like Apple products because..... they will be copying instead of leading.
Done with my rant, thanks for reading...flame away
The shuffle is cheap because it uses less materials and doesn't have any kind of screen on it, not because they cheaped out on engineering, R&D, design, and materials that aren't as durable as other iPod models. For how small it is, though it really isn't that "cheap."
It's super-cheap for an iPod though. Apple reduced the concept in terms of complexity rather than quality.
Does anyone else read quotes from these execs in the execs voice? Lol. Everytime I read Jony, he speaks it in my mind.
Good for them.
I'm not suggesting that Apple should hit junk pile pricing but increasing already incredibly high margins makes sense in the short term only.
Ok, I'm not ready to get pulled apart.
Does anyone else read quotes from these execs in the execs voice? Lol. Everytime I read Jony, he speaks it in my mind.
Good for them.
Yes, I absolutely do that.
Nice way to create even more anti Apple sentiments. Not very smart this Cook. He's not even original.
For me the greatest problem I see for the 5s is not its cost per say as it is what you get for that money. Here I'm specifically thinking flash memory which is quickly becoming marginal in capacity and too high in price on the iPhones. Really 32 GB should be the minimal configuration on a flag ship model. The system and the common apps demands it. This is sorta of what I was getting at, iPhones and even Apples tablets look like great values now. There certainly is little real competition if you look at user acceptance. How long that will go on is unknown. In any event if you look at iPad Mini it really is a low cost machine and competes well at the lower end of the market even if people try to pan it as expensive.
The other thing here is that Apples profit off each iPhone or iPad is on going as it gains significant income from the ecosystem. Apple has a lot more flexibility in pricing thus the various promotions through the telcos. However I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple become more competitive through seasonal promotions like Black Friday sales. If they ship an extra 500,000 during a Black Friday sale it might affect margins a bit but they get much of that back a couple days later when everybody goes to the App Store. I can see Apples attitude slowly changing about pricing, they just have no need to rush right now.
Buying the iPhone 5C instead of 5S is like buying last year MacBook Air or Pro for only $100-$200 cheaper than this year model. And with a plastic case instead of aluminum. Would you buy it? Of course not!
Ah, THAT explains where that other image came from.
Hilarious irony in trolling.
It's super-cheap for an iPod though. Apple reduced the concept in terms of complexity rather than quality.
Apple could reduce it more without sacrificing quality. However, Apple would have to significantly reduce functionality. So, the question becomes is it worth it for Apple to do that? Probably not. It was with music because there are plenty of people who want just a small lightweight music player, but how many people really want a phone that just makes phone calls and nothing more? I doubt very many.
I feel that Apple is being unnecessarily greedy with the iPhone 5C.
The iPhone 5S is a bargain.
Totally true but I'd buy several for grand kids.
All valid points. Next few years will certainly be interesting.