As a professional nerd, these are not "nerd requirements", they're "wannabe nerd requirements." As a professional nerd I work all day fixing things that other people have broken, I don't want to spend my spare time doing the same for my family. iDevices are appliances, not general purpose computers, which is great:
Missing USB ports -> It's a phone, not a computer
Missing a file system -> See above
Jailed -> Good. My wife can't break it
Sandboxed files and applications -> See above
Expensive -> No, they're not. Amortise the cost over the length of time software support is available (3-4 years cf. 1 year for an Android if you're lucky) and the iPhone is *really* cheap.
Any real nerd will understand that a phone is a piece of production equipment, and if you play with it and it all heads South then it can be expensive in terms of call/SMS/data charges, potentially damaging in case of emergency, and - even worse - a loss of internet connection while on the move! There will be people who want a phone as a toy/project *in addition to* their production phone, but these people will number in the hundreds-of-thousands, not hundreds-of-millions.
Good post!!
What's a crack up to me, is that for a developer to write, test an app, the Android developer has to buy a TON of different models, etc. if they want to fully test their product, which increases the sales of Android phones, even though they are barely being used as a daily use phone. With Apple, they don't need to buy 250 different models, they just buy the latest one each year and just stockpile the older models if they still run the latest OS rev. So they only really need to have in their stockpile about 3 or 4 phones for testing purposes.
I'm wondering how many phones get sold solely for the reason so someone can see what it takes to break the phone in some silly amateur video comparing one phone against the other.
I don't know, only about 90% of Wall Street Journal articles written over the last 3 years? Anything not written by Mossberg, basically.
Unlike others, I don't think malice is behind that - although there's certainly always some who want to manipulate a stock price to their own ends. But I think in general the problem is understanding Apple's business model. They don't get it. And they keep comparing Apple/Android with Apple/Microsoft from way back when, even though phones are an entirely different, and several orders of magnitude larger, market.
I've been following Apple forever, about as long as the OP and I understand very well what happened - Apple is fully in its element with these personalized computing appliances. This is what they always wanted to build, only the tech wasn't there. This is what they wanted to build when they built the first Mac in 1984. Now the tech is here, and the genius of Steve Jobs has assembled a team of super heroes who can pull it off. Particularly Tim Cook. Jobs has given him a mission, and he is responsible for Apple's insane cash pile, and for its execution prowess. Without Tim Cook, Apple would still be a bit player. Because having the best products in the world doesn't help if you don't (A) make money off them and (B) make a lot of them. That's why Cook is CEO.
If you feel that way, then why do you listen to them? Just to give you a word of caution. When Apple did that HUGE run up and Munster was saying it was going to go to $1000. Remember that? There was one analyst that said it was going to drop to $400, I wanted to believe Munster, but what happened was that the stock took a nosedive and went down to $400. Lesson learned. One analyst can NOT always be deemed an Apple hater just because he was cautioning that it was going to go down to $400, when Munster gets a LOT more press than this one particular analyst. In the end Munster was DEAD wrong because he was basing is assumptions on iWatches, SmartTVs, etc. back when those rumors first started. Now, I see the iWatches as a potential means for taking up the slack of the iPods since they are almost dead in sales. So I don't really see the iWatches as a HUGE contribution to the profits when they hit the streets. I would see a refreshing of their iPods if they went to 24 bit and iTunes as way to make the iWatches a better addition, but right now, I see the iWatches as only going to take up some of the iPod slack that's been created by the lack of product advancements.
I think Cook needs to use Ive more at product announcements and that he needs to be more passionate about the products. To me, he's overacting and I don't come away from the presentation with goosebumps. I just miss Steve. At least Steve did product demos and did them like real user and made people felt he's STILL actively involved in product creation and real user. Jobs had genuine passion for EVERYTHING Apple makes and to me, Cook is promoting the easier selling iPads and iPhones because he lacks the experience in promoting Macs. Cook bores me with his presentations, I almost want him to get off the stage and let someone else take over the presentations and I shouldn't be feeling this way, but I do.
Just saw the 2014 Q1 market share figures released by Kantar. I cannot say they are impressive for Apple. Although the sales figures of the IPhone are growing, the smartphone market is growing faster, In Italy, the iOS market share (12.9%) is even below Windows Phone(13.9%) and one cannot say that Italy is an underdeveloped country where people don't have the money to buy iPhones.
I do agree that the iPhone is a great product but in countries where the telco's don't subsidize the phone via a 2 year contract, its market share is below 20%, which is nit great. The article of the editor contains valuable points but is too optmistic about the iPhone. the reality is lsightly different
When you say "Anti-Apple", what statements were made by "Wall Street" that makes you believe that they are "Anti-Apple"?
Seriously? Every bad news in the tech sector is somehow worse for Apple and only Apple. WS cries market share like that is the only goal ever. WS complains about lack of cheap iPhone and falling margins. WS doesn't get Apple and it shows.
How is the smartphone market defined?
Seriously? Every bad news in the tech sector is somehow worse for Apple and only Apple. WS cries market share like that is the only goal ever. WS complains about lack of cheap iPhone and falling margins. WS doesn't get Apple and it shows.
Random B list celeb crashes car? One article.
Super hot A list celeb crashes car? An article a day by every major publication.
It's always worked that way.
Things are bigger for Apple because Apple is bigger.
Island Hermit said it was going to be commercial failure.
And he was patting himself on the back when the media was saying it was a failure.
Then that is weird. Even if you aren't a fan of the phone there was absolutely no doubt it would sell...especially after holding one. Very solid device.
Seriously? Every bad news in the tech sector is somehow worse for Apple and only Apple. WS cries market share like that is the only goal ever. WS complains about lack of cheap iPhone and falling margins. WS doesn't get Apple and it shows.
Yeah, probably because it's the most valuable company out there, so it gets effected.
Oh, the lack of cheap phones? THOSE people are just dumb. Hence, the sign to not listen to them.
Well, when they have some falling margins, Apple needs to correct, if they can.
I will say this, I've seen Apple get a LOT more promotion in the media ever since Jobs went back to Apple and when they started gaining in the market and releasing products, so they have been getting a lot of positive feedback, I just think you are just more sensitive to the negative stuff so you notice it more.
I wonder if you actually registered your phone? Oh, yes, you had to.... You either put in your Apple ID which added the phone to your account and either flagged you as a first time iPhone user or a returning iPhone user.
Seriously? Every bad news in the tech sector is somehow worse for Apple and only Apple. WS cries market share like that is the only goal ever. WS complains about lack of cheap iPhone and falling margins. WS doesn't get Apple and it shows.
Not all people on Wall Street are crying Market Share. Some want to actually see that the iWatch is for real and that some other new product category like a more intense AppleTV box, etc. are for real. That's what one person thought was needed more than cheap, profit losing "market share" phones. Just ignore those certain people that think that market share of cheap phones is the answer as you point out how many companies aren't making decent profit margins. HTC, Lenovo, Moto, etc. Samsung makes their own components, so pretty soon Samsung might have some major erosion of their profit margin if they aren't careful. Then they might wake up.
have you been living under a rock the last 2 years?
The media/wall street hacks take every opportunity to bash Apple. Even with 15% profit growth, $30B more in buyback, increased dividend, and stock split there were still some articles last week that said Apple is in trouble because iPad sell through was down 3%.
I just don't pay attention them or not let it bother me.
On another note,
How many quarters has Apple had with a 15% growth from the same quarter previous year? That's great they just had one, but what is Apple projected to do this quarter and the next quarter? Maybe that's what they are looking at. Last quarter just makes them feel better about executing to increase the growth rate. I guess you haven't been in sales before. If you've been in sales, you are only as good your last sale, but they want to know where your next one is coming. Once they celebrate your last sale, it's OK? And? What do you have down the pipe line and can you execute and what's your plans down the road and the likeliness of hitting those numbers with the same level or better. No matter what Apple does, they want consistency and a track record moving forward since they kind of have to redeem themselves from 2013, which sucked.
Look at what they have to do to pay for that little stock purchase. They are increasing debt by issuing bonds. So they'll have more debt. That money has to come from somewhere, so what happens to Apple's inherent worth (not market cap) when they bring on more debt?
Some damn expensive patents that haven't done them any good. They also put billions into operations of a company that lost money every year they owned it. There is no way a reasonable person calls this a successful move by Google.
I don't know what the other poster's thinking, but it's hard to know what potential lawsuits Google thinks have been deterred by their ownership of these patents. Apple keeps going after Samsung -- where there's profits from phones to be had, of course -- and not Google -- the source of the problem. Is that because Google's patent hoard deters them? Who knows? But it may be what Google's thinking.
I thought Samsung and Google renewed their wedding vows recently.
That was a cross-licensing agreement, which would theoretically partially indemnify Samsung. But then again, there has been no clarification on what IP was shared. Maybe Samsung intends to use Google's self-driving car IP?
- Missing true USB ports. Just connect a USB pendrive to share files.
- Missing a decent file system (like the Mac has). Just connect a USB pendrive to see and share files.
- Jailed. Just connect a USB pendrive to share files.
- Sanboxed files and applications. Open any file with any application.
- Expensive. Price should be slashed in half.
Those are deal breakers for hundreds of millions of people. Will Apple learn or will it go the path of the Mac and iOS will eventually become a niche market?
no, what it really needs is a floppy drive. nobody will ever buy one until they put a floppy drive in.
Anti-Apple bias is mainly on Wall St. I suppose it's their failure to understand Apple's business model. They don't understand it and so they treat everything as a one-hit-wonder lucky-strike kind of thing and fail to see that rather the opposite is true. None of this is luck.
I think there's a fair amount of it on Wall St., but I see a lot of it in tech journalism too. Where I do see truly fair tech reporting, I then see some really aggressive comments from readers that accuse the news outlet of bias or being bribed by Apple (this happens frequently on Engadget, for example).
In terms of your comments about screen size - yes, I agree. For most consumers, it's these really big obvious things that are considered (things like screen size, battery life, and maybe some core functionality). The huge "feature list wars" that I see fans arguing about are completely irrelevant to the average consumer (which makes up the lion's share of the market).
I love reading articles from apple fanboys. I was once one but after seeing apple not make much changes to such an old design I felt let down. I was part of the ios7 testers group with my company and was surprised at the cartoonish attempt at design. I really expected much more from apple. When I heard about the motox. Not having to touch the phone yet able to do much more my heart broke for apple. I needed a new phone from my iPhone 4s and was hoping for something amazing from apple. I wanted the dazzle back. I love the motox but did not buy it due to price. I bought a nexus 5 the week it first came out with hopes it would be as good as the motox. With prices coming down on the motox I will sell my nexus 5 for very close what I bought it for and will buy the motox. I will never again pay 600 for a phone. Apple has snob appeal and I have no interest in that unless they really innovate which hasn't happened for a while. No game changers like the motox is.
Comments
As a professional nerd, these are not "nerd requirements", they're "wannabe nerd requirements." As a professional nerd I work all day fixing things that other people have broken, I don't want to spend my spare time doing the same for my family. iDevices are appliances, not general purpose computers, which is great:
Missing USB ports -> It's a phone, not a computer
Missing a file system -> See above
Jailed -> Good. My wife can't break it
Sandboxed files and applications -> See above
Expensive -> No, they're not. Amortise the cost over the length of time software support is available (3-4 years cf. 1 year for an Android if you're lucky) and the iPhone is *really* cheap.
Any real nerd will understand that a phone is a piece of production equipment, and if you play with it and it all heads South then it can be expensive in terms of call/SMS/data charges, potentially damaging in case of emergency, and - even worse - a loss of internet connection while on the move! There will be people who want a phone as a toy/project *in addition to* their production phone, but these people will number in the hundreds-of-thousands, not hundreds-of-millions.
Good post!!
What's a crack up to me, is that for a developer to write, test an app, the Android developer has to buy a TON of different models, etc. if they want to fully test their product, which increases the sales of Android phones, even though they are barely being used as a daily use phone. With Apple, they don't need to buy 250 different models, they just buy the latest one each year and just stockpile the older models if they still run the latest OS rev. So they only really need to have in their stockpile about 3 or 4 phones for testing purposes.
I'm wondering how many phones get sold solely for the reason so someone can see what it takes to break the phone in some silly amateur video comparing one phone against the other.
I don't know, only about 90% of Wall Street Journal articles written over the last 3 years? Anything not written by Mossberg, basically.
Unlike others, I don't think malice is behind that - although there's certainly always some who want to manipulate a stock price to their own ends. But I think in general the problem is understanding Apple's business model. They don't get it. And they keep comparing Apple/Android with Apple/Microsoft from way back when, even though phones are an entirely different, and several orders of magnitude larger, market.
I've been following Apple forever, about as long as the OP and I understand very well what happened - Apple is fully in its element with these personalized computing appliances. This is what they always wanted to build, only the tech wasn't there. This is what they wanted to build when they built the first Mac in 1984. Now the tech is here, and the genius of Steve Jobs has assembled a team of super heroes who can pull it off. Particularly Tim Cook. Jobs has given him a mission, and he is responsible for Apple's insane cash pile, and for its execution prowess. Without Tim Cook, Apple would still be a bit player. Because having the best products in the world doesn't help if you don't (A) make money off them and (B) make a lot of them. That's why Cook is CEO.
If you feel that way, then why do you listen to them? Just to give you a word of caution. When Apple did that HUGE run up and Munster was saying it was going to go to $1000. Remember that? There was one analyst that said it was going to drop to $400, I wanted to believe Munster, but what happened was that the stock took a nosedive and went down to $400. Lesson learned. One analyst can NOT always be deemed an Apple hater just because he was cautioning that it was going to go down to $400, when Munster gets a LOT more press than this one particular analyst. In the end Munster was DEAD wrong because he was basing is assumptions on iWatches, SmartTVs, etc. back when those rumors first started. Now, I see the iWatches as a potential means for taking up the slack of the iPods since they are almost dead in sales. So I don't really see the iWatches as a HUGE contribution to the profits when they hit the streets. I would see a refreshing of their iPods if they went to 24 bit and iTunes as way to make the iWatches a better addition, but right now, I see the iWatches as only going to take up some of the iPod slack that's been created by the lack of product advancements.
I think Cook needs to use Ive more at product announcements and that he needs to be more passionate about the products. To me, he's overacting and I don't come away from the presentation with goosebumps. I just miss Steve. At least Steve did product demos and did them like real user and made people felt he's STILL actively involved in product creation and real user. Jobs had genuine passion for EVERYTHING Apple makes and to me, Cook is promoting the easier selling iPads and iPhones because he lacks the experience in promoting Macs. Cook bores me with his presentations, I almost want him to get off the stage and let someone else take over the presentations and I shouldn't be feeling this way, but I do.
How is the smartphone market defined?
Seriously? Every bad news in the tech sector is somehow worse for Apple and only Apple. WS cries market share like that is the only goal ever. WS complains about lack of cheap iPhone and falling margins. WS doesn't get Apple and it shows.
THEN you can mock it.
Random B list celeb crashes car? One article.
Super hot A list celeb crashes car? An article a day by every major publication.
It's always worked that way.
Things are bigger for Apple because Apple is bigger.
It's not some sort of anti-Apple bias.
Then that is weird. Even if you aren't a fan of the phone there was absolutely no doubt it would sell...especially after holding one. Very solid device.
How is the smartphone market defined?
Seriously? Every bad news in the tech sector is somehow worse for Apple and only Apple. WS cries market share like that is the only goal ever. WS complains about lack of cheap iPhone and falling margins. WS doesn't get Apple and it shows.
Yeah, probably because it's the most valuable company out there, so it gets effected.
Oh, the lack of cheap phones? THOSE people are just dumb. Hence, the sign to not listen to them.
Well, when they have some falling margins, Apple needs to correct, if they can.
I will say this, I've seen Apple get a LOT more promotion in the media ever since Jobs went back to Apple and when they started gaining in the market and releasing products, so they have been getting a lot of positive feedback, I just think you are just more sensitive to the negative stuff so you notice it more.
Hello, sir.
I wonder if you actually registered your phone? Oh, yes, you had to.... You either put in your Apple ID which added the phone to your account and either flagged you as a first time iPhone user or a returning iPhone user.
How is the smartphone market defined?
Seriously? Every bad news in the tech sector is somehow worse for Apple and only Apple. WS cries market share like that is the only goal ever. WS complains about lack of cheap iPhone and falling margins. WS doesn't get Apple and it shows.
Not all people on Wall Street are crying Market Share. Some want to actually see that the iWatch is for real and that some other new product category like a more intense AppleTV box, etc. are for real. That's what one person thought was needed more than cheap, profit losing "market share" phones. Just ignore those certain people that think that market share of cheap phones is the answer as you point out how many companies aren't making decent profit margins. HTC, Lenovo, Moto, etc. Samsung makes their own components, so pretty soon Samsung might have some major erosion of their profit margin if they aren't careful. Then they might wake up.
have you been living under a rock the last 2 years?
The media/wall street hacks take every opportunity to bash Apple. Even with 15% profit growth, $30B more in buyback, increased dividend, and stock split there were still some articles last week that said Apple is in trouble because iPad sell through was down 3%.
I just don't pay attention them or not let it bother me.
On another note,
How many quarters has Apple had with a 15% growth from the same quarter previous year? That's great they just had one, but what is Apple projected to do this quarter and the next quarter? Maybe that's what they are looking at. Last quarter just makes them feel better about executing to increase the growth rate. I guess you haven't been in sales before. If you've been in sales, you are only as good your last sale, but they want to know where your next one is coming. Once they celebrate your last sale, it's OK? And? What do you have down the pipe line and can you execute and what's your plans down the road and the likeliness of hitting those numbers with the same level or better. No matter what Apple does, they want consistency and a track record moving forward since they kind of have to redeem themselves from 2013, which sucked.
Look at what they have to do to pay for that little stock purchase. They are increasing debt by issuing bonds. So they'll have more debt. That money has to come from somewhere, so what happens to Apple's inherent worth (not market cap) when they bring on more debt?
Some damn expensive patents that haven't done them any good. They also put billions into operations of a company that lost money every year they owned it. There is no way a reasonable person calls this a successful move by Google.
I don't know what the other poster's thinking, but it's hard to know what potential lawsuits Google thinks have been deterred by their ownership of these patents. Apple keeps going after Samsung -- where there's profits from phones to be had, of course -- and not Google -- the source of the problem. Is that because Google's patent hoard deters them? Who knows? But it may be what Google's thinking.
That was a cross-licensing agreement, which would theoretically partially indemnify Samsung. But then again, there has been no clarification on what IP was shared. Maybe Samsung intends to use Google's self-driving car IP?
I have to wonder how well the PC shell played out when they've spent some of the marketing basically telling us that metal shells are the way to go.
no, what it really needs is a floppy drive. nobody will ever buy one until they put a floppy drive in.
Anti-Apple bias is mainly on Wall St. I suppose it's their failure to understand Apple's business model. They don't understand it and so they treat everything as a one-hit-wonder lucky-strike kind of thing and fail to see that rather the opposite is true. None of this is luck.
I think there's a fair amount of it on Wall St., but I see a lot of it in tech journalism too. Where I do see truly fair tech reporting, I then see some really aggressive comments from readers that accuse the news outlet of bias or being bribed by Apple (this happens frequently on Engadget, for example).
In terms of your comments about screen size - yes, I agree. For most consumers, it's these really big obvious things that are considered (things like screen size, battery life, and maybe some core functionality). The huge "feature list wars" that I see fans arguing about are completely irrelevant to the average consumer (which makes up the lion's share of the market).