There is a ring of truth to this. My AppleWatch suddenly had battery issues under watchOS3. Airplay stopped working in some apps under tvOS10.0.1. It seems one of the best parts of macOS, Time Machine, is going to be outsourced to third party routers. iCloud is...unintuitive at best; the desktop file storage thingy is an absolute hot mess. AppleTV has an app coming that does...what now? Provide a sales platform for others? Airpods are available...when? But hey, the macbookpro is uber thin! and USB-C reasons! and iOS allows me to get spam calendar things, but not delete emails all at once. DDon't get me started on Siri. Who actually uses that?And here's an ad for a samesung VR device with people enjoying it.
Opie: we expect only Apple to innovate. Those other companies that were lagging behind Apple innovation the previous 15 years are poised to leapfrog past. Sure none are making money. But innovate. Innovate. Innovate!
suddenly newton said:
This is in the grand tradition of "telling Apple what it should be doing" or "listing all the things Apple is missing out on" or "Why Apple will be doomed in the future." Or that troll classic: "Apple relies too much on iPhone."What I find amusing about the last assertion is that it is based on the assumption that if Apple isn't advertising what it's working on next, there is no next big thing. If Oppenheimer concludes that Apple will rely on iPhone in its next decade, then that is incredibly short-sighted. In Apple's first decade, it was profitable because of the Apple II. In its second decade, it was the Macintosh. In its third decade, it was iPod + iTunes. In its fourth decade, it was the iPhone. You can't say you know what will drive Apple's profits in the 2020s.Apple innovates behind closed doors, unlike other companies that dazzle you with "X labs" (which I call "PR labs" because they're for the tech media to write stories about), but those don't count towards making a profit.
Same old same old, doom and gloom. How many times has Apple been copied after they introduced something? They may not have to be first, but try to be the best. They have more money than they can spend last I checked. Plus they are very strategic when spending it. Evolution happens in small increments over time. Waiting on new chips from Intel has probably been their big hold-up. The Mac Pro & iMac are probably on the next updates. Hopefully.
I believe this to be true. Apple has done little to excite the tech world since Jobs. We need them to dream the future and push the timeline on when it is delivered.
mark fearing said:
They don't need to innovate constantly and no company innovates forever. Do they have a business model that lets them stay in business? I think so. Will other companies, ones that haven't even been formed yet make big new products and create new markets? Yes. They always have. Does that mean Apple will become unprofitable? Apple was a company in search of a business model when Jobs came back. They were failing. They found a few things that let them stay afloat...and by afloat I mean becoming one of the wealthiest companies in history. But nothing lasts forever. Just ask IBM and Microsoft and Yahoo and the list goes on, especially in technology.
I think Apple is doing plenty of innovation. However, the issue for me is whether it's in the current management's (and Board's) DNA to do something really bold, something that can move the needle given its behemoth size. I have no clue what that would be, but I could certainly see the car, education, (still) the living room, and India as serious possibilities. I am not so sure about health, since it's an incredibly complicated, messy business. 'Social', music accessories (e.g., Airpods, Beats) and music subscriptions are definitely not 'it' for me.Also, I also feel like some really interesting acquisition possibilities -- e.g., Harman Kardon -- have been left on the table or lost to competitors. Even a McLaren (or a Ferrari, now that it's a publicly traded company) would send a tremendous signal.
The Apple that developed the iPhone was a different Apple from today's. The old Apple was leaner, a whole lot less wealthy, driven and more desperate for a home-run product. Today's Apple doesn't have the same motivation or urgency IMHO. $200B sitting idle in the bank makes a difference in the way a company conducts itself. This Apple can easily afford to be much more patient, with "betting the farm" no longer a driver to push hard and fast on a new product. Just my .02
I"m not even caring that they have failed to innovate. They can't even keep their current products remotely up to date. 3+ year old MacPro's are unacceptable. The seamless Mac eco-system is being fragmented and destroyed by the cancelation of key products (Monitors, routers). Apple monitors are pure source of advertising for a company. Going into an office and seeing all those lit Apple logo's was fantastic mind share. Now we get to see plastic LG monitors and have no clue whats running them. But hey, Apple will only make a hundred million on monitors instead of a 100 billion, so it needs to be axed.They have been switching to USB-C for over a year now and yet only 2 models have them. How am I suppose to buy USB-C peripherals for my company when our MacPro's, iMacs... etc can't use them. The "Hello" event should have a been a complete transition day for all of Apple's desktops, laptops, iphones, and iPads over to USB-C. That's how you transition. I guess, Tim and company really have replaced their computers with iPads because they have no clue how their decisions are affecting people in the real world.
... charging that the company is headed in the wrong direction and poised for a "decade-long malaise" as a result.
Writing about Apple's innovation efforts isn't much different than viewing icebergs; ninety percent is hidden below the surface.Using that for the basis of a long term prediction is at best, moronic.