Oppenheimer: Apple 'lacks the courage to lead the next generation of innovation'

1356710

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 200
    jingojingo Posts: 93member
    Totally agree with Oppenheimer, but I would go further. It seems to me that Apple at present is led by a logistics guy and a guy who is focused on perfect (in his view) physical design. They just don't have a real PRODUCT visionary at the top table. Like Steve Jobs used to be.

    Otherwise AppleTV wouldn't fall so far short of where it needs to be, and have had so much lack of attention over too many years. And they would be the ones with Amazon Echo and what that means for not just content consumption, but the whole smart home space. Right now Amazon, and to a somewhat lesser degree Google, are seriously eating their lunch in terms of innovation. In the past Apple were a bit late to the party but they always did the job better. Nowadays they are not only ridiculously late to the party, but their competition are delivering excellent products that enable them to take over Apple's space or own it from the start, and when they do come along products like the AppleTV are falling way short of their competitors.

    The only area where Apple still have a significant lead is with the Mac, but ironically it is the one area they are largely ignoring and allowing to dwindle away. Add to the lack of new or even revamped products the many dubious specification decisions they take in the name of "aesthetic purity" and they are abusing the loyalty of their computer customers to a quite ridiculous degree.

    What exactly are they spending all that vast amount of R&D money on? It doesn't appear to be R&D, or they should have had a vast range of new and exciting products by now for their customer base. Nothing appears while their competitors are really ratcheting up their efforts and delivering great products.

    I think their efforts are focused gimlet-like on maximising the profitability (to a sometimes insane degree) of their cash cows with no apparent attempt to broaden their product offering and no interest whatsoever in market share. Admirable focus, and should be good for the share price of a utility or resources company, but very dangerous for a technology company.

    Contributors to the share price include profits and cash, but future earnings are also seriously important. Unless they demonstrate a better ability to introduce new revenue streams I am expecting the market to wake up to the lack of future earnings potential and the share price to tank sometime soon - it certainly should do so IMHV.

    If they then demonstrate in the future that they can deliver more new products this could come back, but it will take a while for the market to accept that they really are up to that challenge.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 42 of 200
    altivec88 said:
    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.
    This isn't the first time in history that Apple has taken a break from making monitors. Given past history in fact there's a good chance they'll make
    monitors again and probably with some innovative features added. Just adding a couple of ports isn't Apple's idea of innovating. More likely if they do come back they'll com back with external card support and maybe some other goodies we hadn't thought of. 

    I dont see routers as a key component. Very few people I know ever owned an airport. I've owned all three major versions and about 3 months ago bought one because I thought with my FIOS service I would want one. Well as it turns out the router VZ gave me was faster than the Airport and supported NAS and other USB devices etc. All that being true why would I keep my Airport? Why would anyone spend extra money on an airport? And why would Apple continue to make vanilla wifi routers? Years ago airports were needed to do things most manufacturers didn't support. Now that's no longer true. If Apple continues to work on wifi it will probably be integrated into the ATV or other hub category devices. 
    randominternetpersontmayration al
  • Reply 43 of 200
    jwestveer said:
    Not a touch screen,  but a touch bar?   I'll bet everyone was asking for a touch bar eh?
    It will be a feature pro app users will come to rely on especially as it makes headway into the desktop space also. Obviously you don't have a use for it or you do use Adobe, Avid, FCP, Protools etc and you're too myopic to see how great it would be for adjusting gain on a clip, or levels for a specific color channel etc etc etc. 
    tmayration aljustadcomics
  • Reply 44 of 200
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,788member
    tmay said:
    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.

    Exactly.  Apple "analysts" can only extrapolate from what they see now and what they saw in the past.
    None of them is given anything more than controlled and uncontrolled leaks about the future.
    And they get those leaks from the media (including rumor sites such as AI with well-placed sources).

    All of which makes Apple "analysts" look like a bunch of clueless rookie trainees.
    And that causes frustration.  Which causes some of them to lash out.  
    Am I right, Oppenheimer?
    edited December 2016 ration aldaveinpublicpscooter63ai46justadcomics
  • Reply 45 of 200
    eideardeideard Posts: 394member
    ceek74 said:
    Yet another ploy to lower APPL stock values for future investments.
    Shhh.
    daveinpublic
  • Reply 46 of 200
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member

    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.

    One thing I'm not a fan of is the creation of products to get you to buy something more expensive or to fill a certain price point. For instance what exactly is the purpose of the 13" rMBP without touchbar other than a product specifically created to upsell you to the more expensive model or to fill a certain price point? On John Gruber's latest podcast neither he nor Joanna Stern could recommend that machine to anyone nor understand the point of its existence.
    As if Gruber and Stern have all the answers. Gruber is turning into Marco "The Worrier" Arment.

    So you think Apple spends millions and busts their asses to retool for an upsell product? Yeah, sure, that sounds like them. 

    Might have something to do with their belief that it's an attractive package, what with the size, the lightness, the keyboard, and oh, maybe the display.

    I haven't listened to this podcast yet, since I find the combination of those two to be so irritating,  I may be more pissed off when I do.
    edited December 2016 ration alai46
  • Reply 47 of 200
    tshapitshapi Posts: 294member
    Apple is innovating. What this analyst is complaining about is Apple is not revolutionizing. They aren't turning categories on it's head.the iPod the iPhone, the iPad are all categories Apple turned on its head.  Since Steve died the only category they added was the Apple Watch. 

    I argue that they are overlooking Apple Pay 
    As stated above. Apple is "evolutionizing" not revolutionizing. It's products and pipeline.
    ration al
  • Reply 48 of 200
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,945member
    I agree with the general notion that Apple risks stagnation over the next decade, but I don't agree with the specifics. The stuff about AI, cloud, and services is just a bunch of buzzwords. And actually, I think those are areas where Apple has a good chance of catching up to the competition. They've been making steady progress and if steady progress continues, they should be fine. 

    I think there's a fairly straightforward growth path for Apple -- it's actually not complicated in terms of big picture strategy. , but Apple isn't following it for reasons that I can only speculate about. 

    Despite dropping the word "Computer" from its name, Apple is more of a computer company now than ever before. When else in Apple's history did they design their own CPU or create their own programming language? Apple's core competencies are making very technically advanced computers that are also very easy to use, and tying all of those computers together into a coherent web/ecosystem. I think there are many computer markets where Apple currently does not compete (or markets that haven't been created yet), but could compete quite effectively if they made the effort. There are a lot of growth opportunities. 

    The thing that Apple seems to be having difficulty with is operating in multiple computer markets at the same time. They seem to really be struggling to keep all product lines advancing. Only the iPhone advances at a steady pace. The iPad comes close, but experiences some bumps. So far so good for Watch, but it's very new, so not much track record. The Mac lineup sees very inconsistent progress. The Apple TV seems to exist to make Mac users feel better about the pace of Mac updates. The AirPods -- a new product that really is a wearable computer -- and they can't even launch it on time, even though doing so was very important for the iPhone. 

    So yeah -- Apple has problems. But it's not a buzzword problem. And they don't need some 3 dimensional chess strategy. They just need to organize themselves in a way that will allow them to compete in all the markets where they have the potential to offer a compelling product. 
    ration aliqatedo
  • Reply 49 of 200
    appexappex Posts: 687member
    With all the money in the bank, Apple could lead the next wave of artificial intelligence. The Mac listens and understand natural human voice, learning from experience. All standalone. No cloud computing or connection involved.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 50 of 200
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,709member
    If you think about it, what has Apple done in 5 years?  They created a watch that people do not really need, and they created a 'trash-can' Mac Pro that has not been touched in 3 years and does not sell very well.  They haven't created anything new that people did not realize they actually need...like they did with the iPod and iPhone.  Siri has been around for five years and not much improvement.  They added a few more 'features' like asking about sports or movies, but it makes mistakes quite often when trying to use it.  My Philips Hue lights work better with the Philips app than they do trying to set them up with HomeKit.
    More people have bought the Apple watch than bought the Echo yet the latter was deemed a success. 

    In the last five years: ApplePay, Touch ID to name a couple items. 

    Innovation doesnt mean new product. 
    ration aljustadcomics
  • Reply 51 of 200
    Independent of what level of innovation Apple is currently on:

    "The risks to the company have never been greater."

    yeah, like when they were close to being bankrupt with a few days left of operational ability. Much smaller risk back then.... 
    ration alai46
  • Reply 52 of 200
    tshapi said:

    I argue that they are overlooking Apple Pay 
    I think ApplePay implementation is in fits and starts. It's not backed up by clear or adequate messaging at the consumer level. I like it a lot, and use it whenever I can, but I find it frustrating that, a lot of the time, there is no sticker telling me the PoS terminal is ApplePay-compatible, or even if not, it is an NFC PoS terminal on which I can use my AppleWatch or my iPhone to pay. When I ask the person at the counter, the typical reaction is "I don't know." (I will then try it out if there's no one behind me in line, and with the  person's permission).

    I think Apple missed a huge opportunity in not getting into the PoS hardware business (after all, hardware is really the company's core business): they should have created a beautifully-designed terminal that is priced no more than an AppleTV, and rolled it out to retailers on a subscription basis. They could have even given it away, and made their revenue by adding to the cut on retail transactions, or via some type of installment payment from the retailer.
  • Reply 53 of 200
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member
    blastdoor said:
    I agree with the general notion that Apple risks stagnation over the next decade, but I don't agree with the specifics. The stuff about AI, cloud, and services is just a bunch of buzzwords. And actually, I think those are areas where Apple has a good chance of catching up to the competition. They've been making steady progress and if steady progress continues, they should be fine. 

    I think there's a fairly straightforward growth path for Apple -- it's actually not complicated in terms of big picture strategy. , but Apple isn't following it for reasons that I can only speculate about. 

    Despite dropping the word "Computer" from its name, Apple is more of a computer company now than ever before. When else in Apple's history did they design their own CPU or create their own programming language? Apple's core competencies are making very technically advanced computers that are also very easy to use, and tying all of those computers together into a coherent web/ecosystem. I think there are many computer markets where Apple currently does not compete (or markets that haven't been created yet), but could compete quite effectively if they made the effort. There are a lot of growth opportunities. 

    The thing that Apple seems to be having difficulty with is operating in multiple computer markets at the same time. They seem to really be struggling to keep all product lines advancing. Only the iPhone advances at a steady pace. The iPad comes close, but experiences some bumps. So far so good for Watch, but it's very new, so not much track record. The Mac lineup sees very inconsistent progress. The Apple TV seems to exist to make Mac users feel better about the pace of Mac updates. The AirPods -- a new product that really is a wearable computer -- and they can't even launch it on time, even though doing so was very important for the iPhone. 

    So yeah -- Apple has problems. But it's not a buzzword problem. And they don't need some 3 dimensional chess strategy. They just need to organize themselves in a way that will allow them to compete in all the markets where they have the potential to offer a compelling product. 
    ". . . and they can't even launch it on time." Like they have complete control over the 16 or howmanyever suppliers in Asia that are manufacturing and assembling the parts for the AirPods? Geez, you guys are so full of yourselves in armchair production logistics in the four Asian supplier countries. 

    For the rest of your post, msybe consider that they're building that new headquarters for a reason.

    edited December 2016 ai46
  • Reply 54 of 200
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,608member
    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.
    I am not disputing that Apple has lost some 'edge' and some sense of 'adventure', and perhaps Apple really is drifting into a decade long malaise, but two things need to happen whenever Apple's present and Apple future is discussed:

    1. Understand that Apple is a very different company now than it used to be. That is not an excuse but it is important to understand.
    2. Mentioning Steve Jobs is irrelevant and non constructive. What he would have done, said, tolerated, is conjecture and can never be proven. It is so frustrating when his name is used to point to a sense of former glory as if that proves a point. Reminiscing- yes, Core values- yes, but beyond that - no.
    edited December 2016 ration al
  • Reply 55 of 200
    The analysts can't see the forest for the trees. The expansion of their chip customizations outside of the A series is a significant form of innovation that will continue to snowball over time.
    ration al
  • Reply 56 of 200
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 1,960member
    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.

    One thing I'm not a fan of is the creation of products to get you to buy something more expensive or to fill a certain price point. For instance what exactly is the purpose of the 13" rMBP without touchbar other than a product specifically created to upsell you to the more expensive model or to fill a certain price point? On John Gruber's latest podcast neither he nor Joanna Stern could recommend that machine to anyone nor understand the point of its existence.
    I'm surprised as to how many people are confused regarding the 13" MBP w/;o Touch Bar. It's essentially designed for those that wanted a 13" MBA w / Retina Screen and nothing more.  I would've thought that was clear from the keynote. Maybe some of the confusion comes from it being branded as a MBP.  I don't know if it was this form or another, but someone made a good idea in terms of renaming the Mac laptop line:

    MB Air (12")
    Macbook (13" with no Touch Bar)
    MBP (13" & 15" with Touch Bar)
    ration aljustadcomics
  • Reply 57 of 200
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,945member
    flaneur said:
    blastdoor said:
    I agree with the general notion that Apple risks stagnation over the next decade, but I don't agree with the specifics. The stuff about AI, cloud, and services is just a bunch of buzzwords. And actually, I think those are areas where Apple has a good chance of catching up to the competition. They've been making steady progress and if steady progress continues, they should be fine. 

    I think there's a fairly straightforward growth path for Apple -- it's actually not complicated in terms of big picture strategy. , but Apple isn't following it for reasons that I can only speculate about. 

    Despite dropping the word "Computer" from its name, Apple is more of a computer company now than ever before. When else in Apple's history did they design their own CPU or create their own programming language? Apple's core competencies are making very technically advanced computers that are also very easy to use, and tying all of those computers together into a coherent web/ecosystem. I think there are many computer markets where Apple currently does not compete (or markets that haven't been created yet), but could compete quite effectively if they made the effort. There are a lot of growth opportunities. 

    The thing that Apple seems to be having difficulty with is operating in multiple computer markets at the same time. They seem to really be struggling to keep all product lines advancing. Only the iPhone advances at a steady pace. The iPad comes close, but experiences some bumps. So far so good for Watch, but it's very new, so not much track record. The Mac lineup sees very inconsistent progress. The Apple TV seems to exist to make Mac users feel better about the pace of Mac updates. The AirPods -- a new product that really is a wearable computer -- and they can't even launch it on time, even though doing so was very important for the iPhone. 

    So yeah -- Apple has problems. But it's not a buzzword problem. And they don't need some 3 dimensional chess strategy. They just need to organize themselves in a way that will allow them to compete in all the markets where they have the potential to offer a compelling product. 
    ". . . and they can't even launch it on time." Like they have complete control over the 16 or howmanyever suppliers in Asia that are manufacturing and assembling the parts for the AirPods? Geez, you guys are so full of yourselves in armchair production logistics in the four Asian supplier countries. 

    For the rest of your post, msybe consider that they're building that new headquarters for a reason.

    If Tim Cook walked up and kicked you in the nads, you Panglossian apologists would figure out a way to justify it as the best possible thing he could have done under the circumstances. 

    There was an easy way to avoid this problem with the AirPods -- include a 3.5 mm jack with the iPhone 7 and make the iPhone 7 a bit thicker. 

    Then the AirPods could have come out when they were ready. If people loved the AirPods, that would make removal of the audio jack in the iPhone 8 seem obvious and natural. 

    These are no random events beyond Apple's control; we do not live in the best possible world. Apple is making bad choices. Things could be better; things should be better. 
    razormaidholyone
  • Reply 58 of 200
    MacantoshMacantosh Posts: 4unconfirmed, member
    Isn't all the stuff he mentioned, Siri, the Cloud, messaging, music store, app store, all dependant on the iPhone, iPad, iWatch and Mac. So isn't the iPhone important? Besides, does Opie know what Apple is doing in it's R&D department? I think not. Neither do I, but I'm sure they have some wicked things in there.
    kuduration al
  • Reply 59 of 200
    MacantoshMacantosh Posts: 4unconfirmed, member
    I imagine Apple R&D is like a small DARPA. Heck it could be the same size as DARPA and DARPA has some wicked things.
    tmayjustadcomics
  • Reply 60 of 200
    jwestveer said:
    Not a touch screen,  but a touch bar?   I'll bet everyone was asking for a touch bar eh?
    Everyone was asking for Touch ID, the most secure fingerprint authentication system. It is built upon the Touch Bar. Touch Bar is not there to display colorful emoticons but to carry Touch ID.
    kudu
Sign In or Register to comment.