That's gross revenue. I was under the impression that iPads had a higher profit margin, and hence generated greater profit.
no, you're just wrong.
Furthermore, iPad software development is basically free as it is essentially iPhone software. If they want to keep the Mac software development costs down, they need to replace Mac OS-X with Mac iOS.
The convergence of the two is only a matter of time. The MacBook is becoming less complicated and the iPad is become more comprehensive. With more and more services becoming cloud based and programs managed through stand alone apps, the functional difference between the two device classes is becoming less noticeable. The tablet form factor is the future. You will see the iPad Pro begin to incorporate multiple devices to become a more versatile workstation. The only thing missing on the iPad is the "smarts" of Mac OS, like a more accessible file system, built in printing service, and user security and customizations.
According to Apple's 10K, I think FY2015 Mac revenue was $25B and iPad revenue $23B.
Yep you're right. Which makes that argument even more ridiculous.
There was a lot of complaining when Apple updated iWork. People complained that a lot of features were missing because Apple's focus was on iOS/iCloud first. Do people really believe that a converged device from Apple wouldn't have compromises? It would and my guess is those compromises would likely impact Mac users the most.
Well, he did say the same thing a couple of years ago, about "converging" iOS and OSX, didn't he?
Of course, Apple's mobile processors haven't really been capable of it anyway, have they.
...but, eventually, won't "A?" be?
When that happens, it'll be time to take the question seriously. Denials might then no longer be moot.
The A9 and A9X are faster than the Core-M chip used in the new MacBook. Then you have the Mac mini, which starts with a 1.4Ghz Core-i5 and 4GiB RAM. Let's not forget Apple doesn't have to use those same low-clockrates and reduced cores since space for heat dissipation isn't as big an issue as with their handheld devices.
So...the architecture of the A9 and A9x chip - however "fast" - would allow seamless running of OSX? Good to know.
He's right. Tablets and laptops work differently. Trying to merge them would result in a worst of both worlds kludge.
Laptops center on their keyboards and a trackpad. That means users keep their hands low while sitting at a desks. Tablets involve touching a screen. That's fine in many positions, including sitting in a chair or standing. But it's a cursed nuisance to reach up to a screen when you're typing at a desk.
Also, a touch-screen UI is inherently less powerful than a keyboard, mouse, and graphic pad one. Simple programs port well to touch. I'd hate to see someone try to cram InDesign UI into a touch screen UI.
I am interested, however, in the feasibility of using Apple's new tablet chips in a MacBook Air. There'd be no UI issues, but does the idea make sense technically? That'd I'd like to know.
He's right. Tablets and laptops work differently. Trying to merge them would result in a worst of both worlds kludge.
Laptops center on their keyboards and a trackpad. That means users keep their hands low while sitting at a desks. Tablets involve touching a screen. That's fine in many positions, including sitting in a chair or standing. But it's a cursed nuisance to reach up to a screen when you're typing at a desk.
Also, a touch-screen UI is inherently less powerful than a keyboard, mouse, and graphic pad one. Simple programs port well to touch. I'd hate to see someone try to cram InDesign UI into a touch screen UI.
I am interested, however, in the feasibility of using Apple's new tablet chips in a MacBook Air. There'd be no UI issues, but does the idea make sense technically? That'd I'd like to know.
Why can't those peripherals be optional? Virtual keyboard can take the place of a physical one if people let it. A trackpad or mouse can be available OR app designers can work around to phase out suck an input device. Stylus seem to be making a come back. I also thought that a virtual or even a "knob" in the bezel space of the iPad would be neat for a thumb mouse.
Purely from my perspective I feel Apple could make iOS recognize a mouse and allow for simple control to select apps.
Yes, but not a mouse, a touchpad. They've already created a version of iOS that allows for non-touch input, via the remote with tvOS. That little smart connector on the iPad Pro is key to all this. Drop your (future with smart connector) iOS device in a "docking" station that is connected to a keyboard, touchpad and monitor and you've got a "desktop" system, allowing the flexibility of portable iOS in your iOS device, with the power of a static desktop system with larger monitor and "room" to be productive with keyboard and touchpad interface. This is the future iOS - no need for any convergence, iOS and iDevices will give you better than convergence.
What is a Mac tablet? What would you do that you cannot do on an iPad? or an iPad Pro?
Most Mac App are not touch friendly... look at Windows 10... outside web browsing or file management, what do you use Touch for? Especially with 3D Touch... The 3D trackpack is the best alternative on the Mac.
Yeah, good point. Some light users can be very happy using an iOS tablet for all they'd need to do, and the software and apps are tailored specifically to that. Others need an actual laptop. But merging the two interfaces? That is folly.
While I agree with Tim Cook about the foolishness of an OS X & iOS "hybrid" device, I disagree with him about the supposed "lack of compromises" in what we have right now. Like I said in another thread today, even the iPad PRO is not yet PRO due to the inherent limitations of iOS, the lack of PRO apps (wherefore art thou FCPX on iOS?), and the fact that even though it's a honking 12-inches in size the iPad PRO is still considered a Mobile Device (i.e., like a PHONE), and as such Google kicks down the resolution of YouTube videos on it to 720p (as stupid Google does on all iOS "mobile" devices).
Give us a more feature rich iOS. It's slowly getting there, but it is SLOW. Give us PRO apps for iOS especially catered to the iPad PRO and it's big screen. Give us a tablet that gets around stupid YouTube "720p max" resolution limit and plays 1080p and even 4K. Give us the ability to multi-task more than just 2 apps. If the iPad PRO is really PRO, it should shoot 4K with its camera, not just be able edit 4K you already have somewhere else. Give us the ability to use any Apple Tablet as a viewfinder for pro and prosumer cameras.
And stop telling people like me, "You need a MacBook Pro" or some other such foolishness. Because you full well know that Tim Cook himself is pitching the iPad PRO as a notebook replacement, even if that pitch cannibalizes MacBook sales. He's pitching it as "look at all the things you can do with it," but frankly, it's hardly that much more than what any other iOS device can do right now. The above "Give us" list stands firm.
Give it time for software to catch up to the newly released hardware. It will sink or swim based on the apps developed for it, but it is way too early to tell one way or the other.
It's net revenue. And afaik, there is no data on iPad v. Mac margins put out by Apple.
Don't make up stuff. We have enough useless analysts doing that anyway, and you know no better.
They are "Net sales" numbers. They do not take into account "cost of sales"
Apple's Net Sales last quarter was $51.501 billion, with a $30.953 billion cost of sales (cost of goods/cost of sales). This leaves a gross margin of $20.548 billion. Operating expenses for the quarter ate up $5.925 billion of that gross profit.
The breakdown for the $52.502 billion in gross sales was
iPhone - $32.209 billion
Mac $6.882 billion
iPad - $4.276 billion
Services - $5.086 billion
other - $3.048 billion
While Apple does not publish profit margin per product, third parties do make some informed estimates. While these estimates may not be accurate, they certainly suggest which products are more profitable, and which are less.
What is a Mac tablet? What would you do that you cannot do on an iPad? or an iPad Pro?
Most Mac App are not touch friendly... look at Windows 10... outside web browsing or file management, what do you use Touch for? Especially with 3D Touch... The 3D trackpack is the best alternative on the Mac.
Astoessel! Have you ever used a Mac? What can you do on a Mac that you cannot on an iPad? Well let's see, here's 4 to start...
1. Have several Applications open - as windows, not full screen. As you would...for real business.
2. Store documents locally and access them from a real file system (Finder comes to mind).
3. Run a virtual machine like VMWare
4. Full featured apps, unlike the often crippled IOS versions.
5. Connect a second display.
Do you think the fact that most Mac Apps are not touch friendly might be because...oh...the Mac isn't??!! Duh. Have you considered they might become touch friendly if the Mac was??
Go ahead, keep IOS separate from OSX if that's what Apple wants. Don't converge. That's ok, but don't deny the market for a Mac tablet. There are those like us who really do want to replace our MacBooks with an tablet. The MacBook proves it is technically possible. Read Walt Mossberg's review. The iPad Pro is a nice iPad, but it does NOT replace a MacBook.
The iPad Pro is indeed a nice...iPad. I would buy it if I needed another iPad. But I do more than email and surf and need the freedom of OSX. Sure would love to see a Mac tablet.
Microsoft tried to push that on there customers with Windows 8 and it was a disaster to say the least. Apple said it wouldn't work and they were right. I'm glad Tim knows that and won't make the same kind of disastrous mistake that Microsoft did.
What is a Mac tablet? What would you do that you cannot do on an iPad? or an iPad Pro?
Most Mac App are not touch friendly... look at Windows 10... outside web browsing or file management, what do you use Touch for? Especially with 3D Touch... The 3D trackpack is the best alternative on the Mac.
I have Windows 10 on a small 7" tablet to just play around with. It came with Windows 8.1 is that sucked. Windows 10 is better, but it still sucks on the tablet. File management is one of the worst things on the tablet to do!!! You try that on a 7" screen with tiny text lines trying to click on the thing(s) you want. It sucks!!!! Maybe on the surface it's better with a larger screen.
What I don't hear a lot of of, Why likes to run Anti-Virus software, and firewalls, and Spyware software on their tablets? I just want my Tablet to work without all that garbage.
If anyone thinks this doesn't mean that apples Ax platform will not result in one that can run OSX, they are missing the point.
Great. I get it. iOS and OS X will not converge. However, if the A9X is faster than a MacBook, than a version of the A10 or A11 absolutely will result in a Mac running it with OS X and apps optimized for it (iWork). Apple will not continue to pay for Intel chips if its own are faster. It's a profit margin thing.
Of course Apple will keep paying. To many people are buying Macbook's ect because they can also run Windows Software on them. Installing A* processors on them removes that. Emulation at that point would be to slow to run Windows. Sales of Macbook's would tank.
Astoessel! Have you ever used a Mac? What can you do on a Mac that you cannot on an iPad? Well let's see, here's 4 to start...
1. Have several Applications open - as windows, not full screen. As you would...for real business.
2. Store documents locally and access them from a real file system (Finder comes to mind).
3. Run a virtual machine like VMWare
4. Full featured apps, unlike the often crippled IOS versions.
5. Connect a second display.
6.8 out of 7.1 Billion people need none of these and 4 of the 5 are equivalent requiring buggy whips and manual transmissions on a modern car (Yeah, I have a need to maintain a diesel engine... can you emulate that in this Tesla?)
the author is confusing the notion of an Arm powered Mac with the notion of convergence of the iPad and Mac. One can build an Arm powered Mac that runs Mac OS X without convergence. That is probably what will ultimately happen with the Macbook as Arm processors get faster and more power efficient (and especially cheaper) than Intel processors.
And stop telling people like me, "You need a MacBook Pro" or some other such foolishness. Because you full well know that Tim Cook himself is pitching the iPad PRO as a notebook replacement,
man, how do you people still not get this? he's pitching it as a laptop replacement for people who use CARS, not people who need TRUCKS.
Just stop. The entire point is that Cook doesn't want to release a product like that, and that the products are still separate in functionality. He's saying that yes, for many users the Pro will be good enough to replace their laptops. But he also knows that desktops and laptops are still needed.
.
.
.
Also keep in mind, that Apple is a consumer product company. The number of people who actually need a Mac Pro, or an X-Serve is tiny compared to the number of people who need a sealed box appliance. Take a look at the iMac, Apple actually glues the damn thing closed.
Sure Apple may lose power users, but for every power user they lose, they gain a thousand consumers. Apple has a responsibility to their stockholders (not to their traditional customer base). By losing the high end of the market, and dominating the consumer market, Apple will keep making truckloads of money.
It's important to remember that:
pro/power users are also consumers ..
both use different tools for different jobs ...
the convergence of what/when/how is performed by that blob on top of their necks ...
Comments
you're confused. last quarter apple sold more from mac sales than iPad. their mac business is a major one, larger than many other companies.
no, you're just wrong.
let me guess -- you aren't a developer.
The convergence of the two is only a matter of time. The MacBook is becoming less complicated and the iPad is become more comprehensive. With more and more services becoming cloud based and programs managed through stand alone apps, the functional difference between the two device classes is becoming less noticeable. The tablet form factor is the future. You will see the iPad Pro begin to incorporate multiple devices to become a more versatile workstation. The only thing missing on the iPad is the "smarts" of Mac OS, like a more accessible file system, built in printing service, and user security and customizations.
Yep you're right. Which makes that argument even more ridiculous.
There was a lot of complaining when Apple updated iWork. People complained that a lot of features were missing because Apple's focus was on iOS/iCloud first. Do people really believe that a converged device from Apple wouldn't have compromises? It would and my guess is those compromises would likely impact Mac users the most.
Well, he did say the same thing a couple of years ago, about "converging" iOS and OSX, didn't he?
Of course, Apple's mobile processors haven't really been capable of it anyway, have they.
...but, eventually, won't "A?" be?
When that happens, it'll be time to take the question seriously. Denials might then no longer be moot.
The A9 and A9X are faster than the Core-M chip used in the new MacBook. Then you have the Mac mini, which starts with a 1.4Ghz Core-i5 and 4GiB RAM. Let's not forget Apple doesn't have to use those same low-clockrates and reduced cores since space for heat dissipation isn't as big an issue as with their handheld devices.
So...the architecture of the A9 and A9x chip - however "fast" - would allow seamless running of OSX? Good to know.
Laptops center on their keyboards and a trackpad. That means users keep their hands low while sitting at a desks. Tablets involve touching a screen. That's fine in many positions, including sitting in a chair or standing. But it's a cursed nuisance to reach up to a screen when you're typing at a desk.
Also, a touch-screen UI is inherently less powerful than a keyboard, mouse, and graphic pad one. Simple programs port well to touch. I'd hate to see someone try to cram InDesign UI into a touch screen UI.
I am interested, however, in the feasibility of using Apple's new tablet chips in a MacBook Air. There'd be no UI issues, but does the idea make sense technically? That'd I'd like to know.
Why can't those peripherals be optional? Virtual keyboard can take the place of a physical one if people let it. A trackpad or mouse can be available OR app designers can work around to phase out suck an input device. Stylus seem to be making a come back. I also thought that a virtual or even a "knob" in the bezel space of the iPad would be neat for a thumb mouse.
Purely from my perspective I feel Apple could make iOS recognize a mouse and allow for simple control to select apps.
Yes, but not a mouse, a touchpad. They've already created a version of iOS that allows for non-touch input, via the remote with tvOS. That little smart connector on the iPad Pro is key to all this. Drop your (future with smart connector) iOS device in a "docking" station that is connected to a keyboard, touchpad and monitor and you've got a "desktop" system, allowing the flexibility of portable iOS in your iOS device, with the power of a static desktop system with larger monitor and "room" to be productive with keyboard and touchpad interface. This is the future iOS - no need for any convergence, iOS and iDevices will give you better than convergence.
Yeah, good point. Some light users can be very happy using an iOS tablet for all they'd need to do, and the software and apps are tailored specifically to that. Others need an actual laptop. But merging the two interfaces? That is folly.
Give it time for software to catch up to the newly released hardware. It will sink or swim based on the apps developed for it, but it is way too early to tell one way or the other.
It's net revenue. And afaik, there is no data on iPad v. Mac margins put out by Apple.
Don't make up stuff. We have enough useless analysts doing that anyway, and you know no better.
They are "Net sales" numbers. They do not take into account "cost of sales"
Apple's Net Sales last quarter was $51.501 billion, with a $30.953 billion cost of sales (cost of goods/cost of sales). This leaves a gross margin of $20.548 billion. Operating expenses for the quarter ate up $5.925 billion of that gross profit.
The breakdown for the $52.502 billion in gross sales was
iPhone - $32.209 billion
Mac $6.882 billion
iPad - $4.276 billion
Services - $5.086 billion
other - $3.048 billion
While Apple does not publish profit margin per product, third parties do make some informed estimates. While these estimates may not be accurate, they certainly suggest which products are more profitable, and which are less.
Estimates of the iPad Air 2 are a gross profit of 45 to 57 percent. (http://recode.net/2014/10/28/apples-latest-ipad-costs-about-the-same-as-the-first-but-with-slightly-lower-profits/)
If we call that 50%, we would estimate the net profit from iPad sales at about $2.138 billion
Estimates are about 19% profit margin for Macs (http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/04/16/mac_profits_are_high_too_high.html)
This would put profits from the Mac at about $1.308 billion
If these margins are anywhere close, then even with lower sales, the iPad line generates more profit than the Mac line.
What is a Mac tablet? What would you do that you cannot do on an iPad? or an iPad Pro?
Most Mac App are not touch friendly... look at Windows 10... outside web browsing or file management, what do you use Touch for? Especially with 3D Touch... The 3D trackpack is the best alternative on the Mac.
Astoessel! Have you ever used a Mac? What can you do on a Mac that you cannot on an iPad? Well let's see, here's 4 to start...
1. Have several Applications open - as windows, not full screen. As you would...for real business.
2. Store documents locally and access them from a real file system (Finder comes to mind).
3. Run a virtual machine like VMWare
4. Full featured apps, unlike the often crippled IOS versions.
5. Connect a second display.
Do you think the fact that most Mac Apps are not touch friendly might be because...oh...the Mac isn't??!! Duh. Have you considered they might become touch friendly if the Mac was??
Go ahead, keep IOS separate from OSX if that's what Apple wants. Don't converge. That's ok, but don't deny the market for a Mac tablet. There are those like us who really do want to replace our MacBooks with an tablet. The MacBook proves it is technically possible. Read Walt Mossberg's review. The iPad Pro is a nice iPad, but it does NOT replace a MacBook.
The iPad Pro is indeed a nice...iPad. I would buy it if I needed another iPad. But I do more than email and surf and need the freedom of OSX. Sure would love to see a Mac tablet.
Apple said it wouldn't work and they were right. I'm glad Tim knows that and won't make the same kind of disastrous mistake that Microsoft did.
"Apple will not 'converge' iPad and MacBook lines, says Tim Cook".
Great. Then, please release a Mac tablet to boost sales. Otherwise, it is a deal breaker for our University.
Or buy one of the MacBooks!!! Which is a far better option anyway for school work then a top heavy compromised tablet thing like the Surface!!!
What is a Mac tablet? What would you do that you cannot do on an iPad? or an iPad Pro?
Most Mac App are not touch friendly... look at Windows 10... outside web browsing or file management, what do you use Touch for? Especially with 3D Touch... The 3D trackpack is the best alternative on the Mac.
I have Windows 10 on a small 7" tablet to just play around with. It came with Windows 8.1 is that sucked. Windows 10 is better, but it still sucks on the tablet. File management is one of the worst things on the tablet to do!!! You try that on a 7" screen with tiny text lines trying to click on the thing(s) you want. It sucks!!!! Maybe on the surface it's better with a larger screen.
What I don't hear a lot of of, Why likes to run Anti-Virus software, and firewalls, and Spyware software on their tablets? I just want my Tablet to work without all that garbage.
If anyone thinks this doesn't mean that apples Ax platform will not result in one that can run OSX, they are missing the point.
Great. I get it. iOS and OS X will not converge. However, if the A9X is faster than a MacBook, than a version of the A10 or A11 absolutely will result in a Mac running it with OS X and apps optimized for it (iWork). Apple will not continue to pay for Intel chips if its own are faster. It's a profit margin thing.
Of course Apple will keep paying. To many people are buying Macbook's ect because they can also run Windows Software on them. Installing A* processors on them removes that. Emulation at that point would be to slow to run Windows. Sales of Macbook's would tank.
Astoessel! Have you ever used a Mac? What can you do on a Mac that you cannot on an iPad? Well let's see, here's 4 to start...
1. Have several Applications open - as windows, not full screen. As you would...for real business.
2. Store documents locally and access them from a real file system (Finder comes to mind).
3. Run a virtual machine like VMWare
4. Full featured apps, unlike the often crippled IOS versions.
5. Connect a second display.
6.8 out of 7.1 Billion people need none of these and 4 of the 5 are equivalent requiring buggy whips and manual transmissions on a modern car (Yeah, I have a need to maintain a diesel engine... can you emulate that in this Tesla?)
And most of those 6.8 billion can count to 5.
Bingo!
It's important to remember that: