That's what you wrote, dude. Heavy duty editorializing rather than just reporting
Oh come now, that's not true and you know it. For Mikey to have been editorializing he would have to know what glut MEANS. He obviously has no idea that it doesn't mean "shitload" (don't worry Mikey, I've got your back).
You wouldn't believe how often any of a whole group of writers whose work I see daily will insert some random word that doesn't mean at all what they think it does. It's right up there with superfluous and unnecessary use of the word "had."
Is that true? I don't know about Timelines, but the last time Ming Kuo weighed in on his Q3 Apple predictions, he got almost everything right.
Like what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chazwatson
If you actually look at his past predictions from 2012 and 2013, you'll find they're mostly comprised of product refreshes that line up with the normal cycles. It doesn't take any intelligence to figure that out and put it on a cheesy timeline graphic.
For 2012, he saw the iPad mini coming with parts ramping up, and correctly said Apple was going to start laminating the iMac's glass to the LCD panel.
What did he get wrong? He said the dock connector (Lightning) would be 9-pin, and it would be coming to the iPod touch. And that iPod touch and iPod nano would use a new kind of display panels. And the iPod nano would be wireless.
For 2013, he was totally wrong about a new design for the MacBook Pro, modified iPod touch, and iPod nano refresh. He completely missed the iPad Air. The only thing he got correct is a redesigned iPhone 5.
He also predicted the fingerprint sensor parts would be installed under a convex home button. That mades no sense, but it's what happens when you have all the parts and not enough technical knowledge to put them together.
There were a couple things he knew were coming (iPad mini and iPhone 5 redesign), he's predicted a lot of things that didn't happen, details he got completely wrong, and things he never saw coming.
Kuo calls up suppliers and asks what they're producing and shipping. And potentially fields information provided by leaky insiders. That's all.
Based on his track record, if you pick any one thing he predicts, outside of an expected product refresh, statistics say it will be wrong. But, there's always one thing he gets right, and it's usually big. The question is, what's the one thing he got right?
"We believe the rumored iWatch will be Apple's most important product this year, carrying much more weight than iPhone 6," Kuo writes, adding, "as market feedback for the product should reveal whether Apple still has the ability to continue making game-changing products with Tim Cook at the helm."
If iWatch is a hit, Kuo believes that in five to ten years Apple's competition in the sector will no longer be tech companies, but fashion brand vendors.
I think Kuo is totally misguided in the expectations for an iWatch. Even if it's a huge hit, it simply won't have the profit that the iPhone has. It won't even be close. We don't know what it even will be yet, but it's highly unlikely to be an iPhone replacement, and not even really likely to be an iPhone accessory with broad appeal. If rumors of it being a fitness/health focused accessory are true, it may be very successful, but defined as being very popular with a much smaller demographic and a much lower ASP than the iPhone.
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either. At best, we could see an iWatch with broad appeal (not just a fitness/health accessory for the iPhone) and capable of utility independent of the iPhone, at a price that makes it a game changer in the long-since dead digital watch industry, and while that would be huge by other standards, it would still pale in comparison to what Apple has achieved with the iPod, iPhone and iPad.
I think Kuo is totally misguided in the expectations for an iWatch. Even if it's a huge hit, it simply won't have the profit that the iPhone has. It won't even be close. We don't know what it even will be yet, but it's highly unlikely to be an iPhone replacement, and not even really likely to be an iPhone accessory with broad appeal. If rumors of it being a fitness/health focused accessory are true, it may be very successful, but defined as being very popular with a much smaller demographic and a much lower ASP than the iPhone.
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either. At best, we could see an iWatch with broad appeal (not just a fitness/health accessory for the iPhone) and capable of utility independent of the iPhone, at a price that makes it a game changer in the long-since dead digital watch industry, and while that would be huge by other standards, it would still pale in comparison to what Apple has achieved with the iPod, iPhone and iPad.
I read an article that panned the whole watch thing. They said iWatch was a verb, not a noun, and that iWatch was all about the TV and nothing about a wearable device. Also used by Apple while they do a double reverse; a way to keep competitors wasting R&D + lots of time and $ on a watch (namely Samsung).
I think Kuo is totally misguided in the expectations for an iWatch. Even if it's a huge hit, it simply won't have the profit that the iPhone has. It won't even be close. We don't know what it even will be yet, but it's highly unlikely to be an iPhone replacement, and not even really likely to be an iPhone accessory with broad appeal. If rumors of it being a fitness/health focused accessory are true, it may be very successful, but defined as being very popular with a much smaller demographic and a much lower ASP than the iPhone.
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either. At best, we could see an iWatch with broad appeal (not just a fitness/health accessory for the iPhone) and capable of utility independent of the iPhone, at a price that makes it a game changer in the long-since dead digital watch industry, and while that would be huge by other standards, it would still pale in comparison to what Apple has achieved with the iPod, iPhone and iPad.
Apple detractors will be copy/pasting your post into their blog comments as you've practically hit all the points they will use once Apple's product hits the ground running. Of course they could just go back and copy/paste their old bla bla bla when the iPhone and iPad came out, it really doesn't matter to someone with no vision...
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either.
If Apple has taught us anything, it's that we shouldn't judge the future based on what has (or has not) worked before.
There are numerous ways in which Apple products currently touch on the fashion world (without necessarily competing directly in that space). Also, Apple recently appointed Burberry CEO Angela Ahrendts to head up their work with retail and online stores. Although this doesn't imply a direct competition with fashion products per se, I think that it indicates Apple's awareness of the broader design landscape within which their products exist.
If iWatch even exists (and I really hope they don't call it that), then there will be a definite and obvious overlap with the fashion world. In terms of competition, I would actually say that Apple has no serious competitors in the wearables space (at least, not in terms of anything more sophisticated than a FitBit) - so the field is still wide open for them. However, I think they will need to more keenly sharpen their instincts about fashion in ways they haven't previously.
I actually don't think it makes sense for Apple to go near this space at all unless they can do with wearables what they did with tablets - that is, completely redefine the entire product category and create a fresh starting line. If they simply release a touch screen watch, then I have doubts about their ability to do this.
If, however, they are developing something very different (e.g. a seamless band/bangle where the entire surface is a new kind of touch interface), then I think that would be genuinely interesting (this is why I dislike the term "iWatch" - I'm hoping Apple are more inventive than that...)
Does this mean a low cost upgrade (MacMini) AND a iMac upgrade, or just an iMac upgrade that's a low cost model. The chart is a little suspicious as to what it really means. If it's a Mac mini (low cost) and an iMac next month, then that's pretty good news. NOT great, but OK.
Waiting until Sept for new ~5 inch? A little later than I would want. is there going to be a 4inch refresh as well? or just the ~5 inch. A little unclear.
I would say that the iWatch is PROBABLY going to only pick up the slack because they don't look like they are releasing new iPods, so that's how I would treat the iWatch in terms of adding to the bottom line. They might make great stocking stuffers like iPods used to. Boy I was hoping they would release 24 bit iPods to keep Pono from gaining traction.
Boy I was hoping they would release 24 bit iPods to keep Pono from gaining traction.
I LOL'd at "keep Pono from gaining traction."
You are hopelessly optimistic if you think the Pono is going to go anywhere. Millions of folks are already accustomed to having a potable music play that the can put in their pocket easily.
You are hopelessly optimistic if you think the Pono is going to go anywhere. Millions of folks are already accustomed to having a potable music play that the can put in their pocket easily.
I think the Pono is DOA.
I know it can be easily squashed, but right now they are getting attention and more people lining up to buy it. I would just simply shut the door as quickly as possible just to solidify the situation. I know Pono is not going anywhere fast, but so is the iPod. By not going 24 bit, it prevents additional iTunes growth and resurgence of iPods. think about it this way. I bought in the past so many months more 24 bit content from other sources than I did buy through iTunes. So the money I spent was with someone else. They have the content, Apple doesn't. So who gets the business? Someone else. It's not just the players, it's also content. Some of these people that buy 24 bit content spend Thousands of Dollars per year for just one person. It's not just Pono, it's HD Tracks, Acoustic Sounds and others that sell 24 bit content. Plus, is Amazon going to enter this market too? Once that door opens, then more flies are attracted. How many flies going after that market is it going to take until Apple decides to do something about it? How much lost business do they lose in the mean time?
I think they release more and more products in the fall now to coincide with the back to school and holiday shopping seasons. Sales are highest at that time so it makes sense to have your product line be at its most competitive then, especially since the market is more competitive now than it was when the iPhone and iPad first debuted.
One roll out per quarter. A typical buyer may have an extra $1000 dollars at one in their banks account. Give them time to replenish between quarterly bouts of Apple lust.
Expecting them to have $4000 to buy everything in one quarter splurge is against the way things work for the financially challenged gismo buyer.
It is obvious a bean counter decision on reducing production costs rather that a buyer friendly approach to the announcements.
Comments
In other news: Appleinsider has glut of apples, makes cider.
d4NjvRzf
The entry-level iMac already lacks discrete graphics and comes with a mechanical hard drive. How much more low-end can it get?
Indiscreet graphics and a floppy drive.
That's what you wrote, dude. Heavy duty editorializing rather than just reporting
Oh come now, that's not true and you know it. For Mikey to have been editorializing he would have to know what glut MEANS. He obviously has no idea that it doesn't mean "shitload" (don't worry Mikey, I've got your back).
You wouldn't believe how often any of a whole group of writers whose work I see daily will insert some random word that doesn't mean at all what they think it does. It's right up there with superfluous and unnecessary use of the word "had."
Is that true? I don't know about Timelines, but the last time Ming Kuo weighed in on his Q3 Apple predictions, he got almost everything right.
Like what?
If you actually look at his past predictions from 2012 and 2013, you'll find they're mostly comprised of product refreshes that line up with the normal cycles. It doesn't take any intelligence to figure that out and put it on a cheesy timeline graphic.
For 2012, he saw the iPad mini coming with parts ramping up, and correctly said Apple was going to start laminating the iMac's glass to the LCD panel.
What did he get wrong? He said the dock connector (Lightning) would be 9-pin, and it would be coming to the iPod touch. And that iPod touch and iPod nano would use a new kind of display panels. And the iPod nano would be wireless.
For 2013, he was totally wrong about a new design for the MacBook Pro, modified iPod touch, and iPod nano refresh. He completely missed the iPad Air. The only thing he got correct is a redesigned iPhone 5.
He also predicted the fingerprint sensor parts would be installed under a convex home button. That mades no sense, but it's what happens when you have all the parts and not enough technical knowledge to put them together.
There were a couple things he knew were coming (iPad mini and iPhone 5 redesign), he's predicted a lot of things that didn't happen, details he got completely wrong, and things he never saw coming.
Questioning the word choice or the scope?
...
"We believe the rumored iWatch will be Apple's most important product this year, carrying much more weight than iPhone 6," Kuo writes, adding, "as market feedback for the product should reveal whether Apple still has the ability to continue making game-changing products with Tim Cook at the helm."
If iWatch is a hit, Kuo believes that in five to ten years Apple's competition in the sector will no longer be tech companies, but fashion brand vendors.
I think Kuo is totally misguided in the expectations for an iWatch. Even if it's a huge hit, it simply won't have the profit that the iPhone has. It won't even be close. We don't know what it even will be yet, but it's highly unlikely to be an iPhone replacement, and not even really likely to be an iPhone accessory with broad appeal. If rumors of it being a fitness/health focused accessory are true, it may be very successful, but defined as being very popular with a much smaller demographic and a much lower ASP than the iPhone.
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either. At best, we could see an iWatch with broad appeal (not just a fitness/health accessory for the iPhone) and capable of utility independent of the iPhone, at a price that makes it a game changer in the long-since dead digital watch industry, and while that would be huge by other standards, it would still pale in comparison to what Apple has achieved with the iPod, iPhone and iPad.
I think Kuo is totally misguided in the expectations for an iWatch. Even if it's a huge hit, it simply won't have the profit that the iPhone has. It won't even be close. We don't know what it even will be yet, but it's highly unlikely to be an iPhone replacement, and not even really likely to be an iPhone accessory with broad appeal. If rumors of it being a fitness/health focused accessory are true, it may be very successful, but defined as being very popular with a much smaller demographic and a much lower ASP than the iPhone.
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either. At best, we could see an iWatch with broad appeal (not just a fitness/health accessory for the iPhone) and capable of utility independent of the iPhone, at a price that makes it a game changer in the long-since dead digital watch industry, and while that would be huge by other standards, it would still pale in comparison to what Apple has achieved with the iPod, iPhone and iPad.
I read an article that panned the whole watch thing. They said iWatch was a verb, not a noun, and that iWatch was all about the TV and nothing about a wearable device. Also used by Apple while they do a double reverse; a way to keep competitors wasting R&D + lots of time and $ on a watch (namely Samsung).
You forget his dog, his girl, and his best friend.
I think Kuo is totally misguided in the expectations for an iWatch. Even if it's a huge hit, it simply won't have the profit that the iPhone has. It won't even be close. We don't know what it even will be yet, but it's highly unlikely to be an iPhone replacement, and not even really likely to be an iPhone accessory with broad appeal. If rumors of it being a fitness/health focused accessory are true, it may be very successful, but defined as being very popular with a much smaller demographic and a much lower ASP than the iPhone.
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either. At best, we could see an iWatch with broad appeal (not just a fitness/health accessory for the iPhone) and capable of utility independent of the iPhone, at a price that makes it a game changer in the long-since dead digital watch industry, and while that would be huge by other standards, it would still pale in comparison to what Apple has achieved with the iPod, iPhone and iPad.
Apple detractors will be copy/pasting your post into their blog comments as you've practically hit all the points they will use once Apple's product hits the ground running. Of course they could just go back and copy/paste their old bla bla bla when the iPhone and iPad came out, it really doesn't matter to someone with no vision...
Further, I don't see t competing in the fashion sector. The tech and fashion sectors have tried intersecting in the past, and it's never worked out well for either.
If Apple has taught us anything, it's that we shouldn't judge the future based on what has (or has not) worked before.
There are numerous ways in which Apple products currently touch on the fashion world (without necessarily competing directly in that space). Also, Apple recently appointed Burberry CEO Angela Ahrendts to head up their work with retail and online stores. Although this doesn't imply a direct competition with fashion products per se, I think that it indicates Apple's awareness of the broader design landscape within which their products exist.
If iWatch even exists (and I really hope they don't call it that), then there will be a definite and obvious overlap with the fashion world. In terms of competition, I would actually say that Apple has no serious competitors in the wearables space (at least, not in terms of anything more sophisticated than a FitBit) - so the field is still wide open for them. However, I think they will need to more keenly sharpen their instincts about fashion in ways they haven't previously.
I actually don't think it makes sense for Apple to go near this space at all unless they can do with wearables what they did with tablets - that is, completely redefine the entire product category and create a fresh starting line. If they simply release a touch screen watch, then I have doubts about their ability to do this.
If, however, they are developing something very different (e.g. a seamless band/bangle where the entire surface is a new kind of touch interface), then I think that would be genuinely interesting (this is why I dislike the term "iWatch" - I'm hoping Apple are more inventive than that...)
Waiting until Sept for new ~5 inch? A little later than I would want. is there going to be a 4inch refresh as well? or just the ~5 inch. A little unclear.
I would say that the iWatch is PROBABLY going to only pick up the slack because they don't look like they are releasing new iPods, so that's how I would treat the iWatch in terms of adding to the bottom line. They might make great stocking stuffers like iPods used to. Boy I was hoping they would release 24 bit iPods to keep Pono from gaining traction.
Boy I was hoping they would release 24 bit iPods to keep Pono from gaining traction.
I LOL'd at "keep Pono from gaining traction."
You are hopelessly optimistic if you think the Pono is going to go anywhere. Millions of folks are already accustomed to having a potable music play that the can put in their pocket easily.
I think the Pono is DOA.
I LOL'd at "keep Pono from gaining traction."
You are hopelessly optimistic if you think the Pono is going to go anywhere. Millions of folks are already accustomed to having a potable music play that the can put in their pocket easily.
I think the Pono is DOA.
I know it can be easily squashed, but right now they are getting attention and more people lining up to buy it. I would just simply shut the door as quickly as possible just to solidify the situation. I know Pono is not going anywhere fast, but so is the iPod. By not going 24 bit, it prevents additional iTunes growth and resurgence of iPods. think about it this way. I bought in the past so many months more 24 bit content from other sources than I did buy through iTunes. So the money I spent was with someone else. They have the content, Apple doesn't. So who gets the business? Someone else. It's not just the players, it's also content. Some of these people that buy 24 bit content spend Thousands of Dollars per year for just one person. It's not just Pono, it's HD Tracks, Acoustic Sounds and others that sell 24 bit content. Plus, is Amazon going to enter this market too? Once that door opens, then more flies are attracted. How many flies going after that market is it going to take until Apple decides to do something about it? How much lost business do they lose in the mean time?
And I expect the iWatch will go over as well as Google Glass.
I agree, glut makes it sound like they are dumping excess inventory.
How about just saying a slew, cavalcade, myriad. $hit load, etc.?
I think they release more and more products in the fall now to coincide with the back to school and holiday shopping seasons. Sales are highest at that time so it makes sense to have your product line be at its most competitive then, especially since the market is more competitive now than it was when the iPhone and iPad first debuted.
Expecting them to have $4000 to buy everything in one quarter splurge is against the way things work for the financially challenged gismo buyer.
It is obvious a bean counter decision on reducing production costs rather that a buyer friendly approach to the announcements.