Apple's massive $3B bet on Beats a sure thing compared to all-in gamble on NeXT in 1996

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 108
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

     

    Before

     

    [member of NWA]

     

    After

     

    [member of the executive team for one of the richest corporations on the planet]


     

    Pretty cool, isn't it?

  • Reply 82 of 108
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    sucaj wrote: »
    Way to miss the point.  I do not "abhor a bass-y beat".  I prefer my headphones to accurately recreate the sound of what I'm listening to (shocker, I know).  When I want a lot of bass, as I frequently do, I turn up the EQ - like everyone else since the dawn of home stereo.  

    Beats takes that power out of my hands by artificially enhancing the low-end regardless of whether I want it or not - a process which causes clipping and results in inferior sound.  Their hardware isn't any better at the low-end than the cheapest of headphones - it's just artificially amplified at all times.  It's not any more complicated than that.  In fact, not only is the hardware not better, it's worse - by overstimulating the senses with a heavy and impressive low end, they overshadow the pathetic performance from the midrange and upper frequencies in the crappy driver components they use.  

    Can't argue with any of that, just saying that what you call overstimulating, pathetic, crappy, etc., is what drives the sales, not what to your eyes looks like style or image. Your senses are tuned differently, mine as well, from this generation's that we're talking about. They came up with different sound systems, different drugs, all that stuff that makes one generation separate from another musically.

    If bests had tried to sell balanced headphones they wouldn't have caught on. The fact remains that they're the first to succeed on the street because of that crappy sound. Apple is probably going to try to improve them, but you know they're going have keep them bass heavy somehow or other.
  • Reply 83 of 108
    awilliams87awilliams87 Posts: 264member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

     

    - Profitable company

    - Sells expensive headphones people are willing to buy in large quantities

    - Streaming service

    - Content creator connections

    - Previous work history with the people involved

    - A way to add value by getting people to use Apple related products on other platforms

    - Apple can get far more favorable pricing on components than Beats alone. So there is a clear path for Apple to significantly improve upon the quality of the headphones.

     

    If acquiring an already thriving and highly profitable business is not in Apple's DNA, it should be. 


    Why do you people keep saying Beats is profitable? They make no profits dude. That $1.1 billion figure was sales, not profits. Their streaming service actually lose the most money and would eventually be discontinued over time had it attempted to exist on it's own.

  • Reply 84 of 108
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Why do you people keep saying Beats is profitable? They make no profits dude. That $1.1 billion figure was sales, not profits. Their streaming service actually lose the most money and would eventually be discontinued over time had it attempted to exist on it's own.

    Why do you keep saying they make no profits, dude? Where is your evidence to support that claim?
  • Reply 85 of 108
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    You're a
    You're a really big beats fan aren't you?

    No, actually, I'm a fan of Apple moving into as many markets as possible, as long as they can keep their aesthetics and ethics intact. I never listen to the kind of music beats are designed for, and I generally don't like unreal bass. My taste has nothing to do with this. It's about including another third of the world (or so) into Apple's user base. The more people who speak the Apple language the better.
  • Reply 86 of 108
    Didn't I hear that Apple is trying to change the standard mini plug? Picking up beats seems it would really help with adoption of a new standard there...
  • Reply 87 of 108
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Didn't I hear that Apple is trying to change the standard mini plug? Picking up beats seems it would really help with adoption of a new standard there...

    I seem to recall seeing patents. But we're talking headphones so perhaps Apple, if this comes to pass, will do like it did with mDP by making it free. It's possible they need more data to pass through the headphone if they want the "origin' wearable electronics to have some sort of biometric in the ear canal with in-ear phones. That's a reason to change it up from the 3.5mm jack. Still, we might be getting close to where BT headsets are a viable alternative.
  • Reply 88 of 108
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,289member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Well this is disappointing. Apparently the home automation rumors that the Financial times reported on are nothing more than a Made for iPhone program for connected devices in your home. Essentially all of those devices would still be controlled by their respective individual apps. I hope Apple isn't considering that some big announcement for Monday. I don't see anything exciting about that. It's about as exciting as the MFI game controllers. Zzzzzzz



    http://gigaom.com/2014/05/29/heres-how-apples-smart-home-program-will-work-2/

    First, it's a rumour based on another rumour.

    Second, you are on the wrong thread.

    Third, even if Apple obtaining Beats turned out to be a dude in the future, it's a mere 0.5% of their market cap. They can always sell it back.

  • Reply 89 of 108
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member

    Seems that even the biggest Apple defenders on AI are having a hard time rationalizing the Beats purchase to themselves.  Maybe that's why there is no fluffy DED article yet?

  • Reply 90 of 108
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    haggar wrote: »
    Seems that even the biggest Apple defenders on AI are having a hard time rationalizing the Beats purchase to themselves.  Maybe that's why there is no fluffy DED article yet?

    Can you back that up?
  • Reply 91 of 108
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    Can you back that up?

     

    It’s Haggar.

  • Reply 92 of 108
    mr omr o Posts: 1,046member

    I still don't understand.

     

    How is Beats going to help Apple give focus?

     

    How is it compatible with Apple's culture? Beats has about a gazillion different colored headphones on their website. From tacky to bloated. I can't see their products mix with the refined zen like esthetic of Jonathan Ive?

     

    Well, I guess we will have to wait until Monday.

     

    The comparison with Next is a bit wide off the mark:



    1. Jimmy Iovine is not Steve Jobs.

    2. The Beats headphones and streaming service are not comparable to the revolutionary Operating system of Next.

    3. The Next engineering team (with Craig Federichi and others) was full of bright people. Apple was buying Technology and a visionary Leader (the founder of Apple) at the time. Today Apple is buying a lifestyle and a rapper ?!? 

     

    Everything is possible now.



    Bring on the golden 5.5" iPhone. It'll certainly fit in dr Dre's pockets.

     

    This article has made me even more suspicious.

  • Reply 93 of 108
    dnd0psdnd0ps Posts: 253member
    sucaj wrote: »
    This acquisition has almost single-handedly sucked out all of my enthusiasm for Apple... and I say this as the owner of my 6th iPhone, 3rd iPad, and countless MacBooks/Powerbooks.   Facebook and Google are busy acquiring innovative tech companies like Oculus and Word Lens - and Apple is busy acquiring for image and style.  This is like Apple acquiring king-of-shitty-audio Bose.  If you think Beats sound good, you should have turned up your bass EQ and saved yourself the $200 brand fee.  This is a horrible mismatch in company culture and product design approach.  This is the business version of cranky old neighbor Tim Cook listening to "the rap music" in order to relate to the neighborhood kids. 

    The thing about oculus is that they're still in beta.

    Apple is more than a tech company, it's a lifestyle brand. What I see in Beats is an unparalleled ability to market their products in a way that's similar to Apple
    Their hardware may not justify, but given Apples world class engineering team I think that's a relatively easy problem to solve.
  • Reply 94 of 108
    dnd0psdnd0ps Posts: 253member
    apple ][ wrote: »
    The Beats brand is garbage compared to Apple, so it makes no sense at all for Apple to want to build off of that.

    What's next? Is Ferrari going to acquire the Ford Pinto brand, because they wish to build off of that, since their own name isn't good enough obviously?
    There's more parallelism between the beats brand and apple than you might think.

    Beats like apple is revered amongst general consumers, hated by a subset of techies and loved by others.
  • Reply 95 of 108
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

     

    Before

     

     

    After


    Rap music is definitely inferior to classical music. If you have ever gone Cold Turkey and just listened to classical music for several months, and then gone back to mainstream music, your brain is like "What the hell is this simplisitic sh*t?" You just giggle at how simple it is.

     

    But there is a tradition in Western society of letting the youth find their own way. Maybe in other cultures they try to control their kids and discourage them from listening to s*it. But we tend to let them go their own way, knowing that once they (eventually) start thinking for themselves, they will gradually come back in to the fold. As evidenced by the photos above of Dr. Dre as a hood in his youth, but a successful businessman in his maturity.

     

    It's the only way that works in the long run. I know some Asian kids forced to be perfect their whole lives and when they hit 40 they have mid life breakdown.

  • Reply 96 of 108
    bobjohnsonbobjohnson Posts: 154member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mr O View Post



    1. Jimmy Iovine is not Steve Jobs.

    2. The Beats headphones and streaming service are not comparable to the revolutionary Operating system of Next.

    3. The Next engineering team (with Craig Federichi and others) was full of bright people. Apple was buying Technology and a visionary Leader (the founder of Apple) at the time. Today Apple is buying a lifestyle and a rapper ?!? 


     

    1. What does that even mean? Let's not forget that SJ was fired from Apple, had his ass saved by Ed Catmull and John Lassiter at Pixar, and nearly bankrupted NeXT when they were bought. Nobody knows what the future holds. 

    2. Let's not forget that Apple only turned to NeXT after a deal with BeOS fell through. 

    3. How do you know what Beats's engineering team looks like? Are you personally aware of their organizational structure and possibly have a list of their personnel?

     

    The NeXT deal was a major risk at the time, and only looks smart in hindsight. Bunch of armchair CEOs in here.  

  • Reply 97 of 108
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I seem to recall seeing patents. But we're talking headphones so perhaps Apple, if this comes to pass, will do like it did with mDP by making it free. It's possible they need more data to pass through the headphone if they want the "origin' wearable electronics to have some sort of biometric in the ear canal with in-ear phones. That's a reason to change it up from the 3.5mm jack. Still, we might be getting close to where BT headsets are a viable alternative.

    If they want to keep making sales to owners of non-Apple devices, they'll stick with the standard plug. There's no business reason to be made for a nonstandard jack unless nonstandard becomes the new standard. :D
  • Reply 98 of 108
    almondrocaalmondroca Posts: 179member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

     

    My original negative take was based off of a headphone purchase a young friend of mine made several months back. He often consults me about any tech type questions and asks my opinion. He wanted some high quality headphones and was trying to decide between a few different Beats models. I did some research and gave him a few suggestions for models by Shure and Sennheiser instead were actually cheaper but seemed to get far better ratings from some pro review sites. He would have none of it. 


     

    Young friend probably wouldn't be caught dead with Grados on either, even if his hipster brother gave him a pair.

  • Reply 99 of 108
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member

    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

     

    This is an ignorant pile of thought. With just over 300 regular full-time employees, world-wide, Apple gains a world class Operating System for the Consumer to the Federal Govt., decades worth of technologies that are the heart and soul of Apple today.

     

    Sorry, but please don't speak of NeXT, unless you were an employee at NeXT. You paint yourself a fool to do so.


     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

     

     

    I've never worked at NeXT and I'm not connected to them in any way, but I would be offended too, if somebody compared NeXT, which provided the foundation that all Apple products are built upon today, to a company that merely makes headphones. What a joke.<img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mr O View Post

    The comparison with Next is a bit wide off the mark:



    1. Jimmy Iovine is not Steve Jobs.

    2. The Beats headphones and streaming service are not comparable to the revolutionary Operating system of Next.

    3. The Next engineering team (with Craig Federichi and others) was full of bright people. Apple was buying Technology and a visionary Leader (the founder of Apple) at the time. Today Apple is buying a lifestyle and a rapper ?!? 

     


    Aren't you missing the point? It has nothing to do with the relative merits of NeXT vs. Beats. It's only mentioning that when Apple acquired NeXT, Apple's very existence was on the line - it spent 15% of the entire worth of Apple on NeXT. Apple was crumbling at that point, and bet it all on Steve Jobs and a radically new operating system. Big risk, but big reward.

     

    The Beats buy, on the other hand, is merely a blip in Apple's finances.

     

    That's all the article says.

  • Reply 100 of 108
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

     

    I prefer bass heavy headphones. So given the reviews I may check out a pair. Now I will have a pair of Bose for at the gym and a pair for elsewhere. After trying out beats streaming service I actually prefer it to Spotify.


    You're joking right, Spotify is way better than Beats streaming service.:no:

Sign In or Register to comment.