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

1468910

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 200
    tmay said:
    jungmark said:

    altivec88 said:
    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. 
    Although, you may not see routers as a key component, I believe they are.   To many users, especially those that are not very computer literate they choose Apple because "it just works".   When these people walk into a store, they pick up their mac, maybe a monitor, a router and go home.  Plug it all in and few steps it all works.

    Today.  they walk into a store and buy a mini for example.  They then say I'll need a monitor.  Sorry sir, Apple doesn't sell monitors and the LG one we sell won't work with that.  Maybe the PC store across the street can help you with that.   Okay. can I just connect this to the internet?  No sir.  You will need a router and then follow the 50 step process. (make sure its secure or else).  These are the 10 routers we sell. Which one do you want.

    Heck you can go in buy and brand new Macbook Pro, go home and be surprised it doesn't connect to your brand new iPhone or iPad.  Off to the store again.  

    All these things may sound trivial but this is no longer the Apple I know.   Everything takes back seat to the iPhone and they are completely neglecting or misunderstanding there core markets.  When the iPhone gravy train is over, their will be nothing left to fall back on.  In 30+ years, I've never seen Apple in such disarray.
    Many ISPs combine the modem/router into a single device. Therefore an additional router isn't needed. 

    Plus Apple doesn't sell modems either or is an ISP. So the consumer should be smart enough to get that on their own. 
    It's also quite possible that Apple has plans for a HomeKit device that would handle router duties, or even, an Apple TV that does the same.

    Maybe the problem is that a router, as a singular device, doesn't fit the ecosystem anymore.

    Yes!  Possibly a combo device:  Router;  HomeKit Hub;  AppleTV;  Time Machine; Home/Streaming/iCloud Server...

    A local device based on the A10X could handle all these tasks with ease!

    Then, there's the new Apple File System and FoundationDB -- lots of possibilities there...  But it all takes time to design, integrate and test.

  • Reply 102 of 200
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,433member
    tmay said:
    jungmark said:

    altivec88 said:
    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. 
    Although, you may not see routers as a key component, I believe they are.   To many users, especially those that are not very computer literate they choose Apple because "it just works".   When these people walk into a store, they pick up their mac, maybe a monitor, a router and go home.  Plug it all in and few steps it all works.

    Today.  they walk into a store and buy a mini for example.  They then say I'll need a monitor.  Sorry sir, Apple doesn't sell monitors and the LG one we sell won't work with that.  Maybe the PC store across the street can help you with that.   Okay. can I just connect this to the internet?  No sir.  You will need a router and then follow the 50 step process. (make sure its secure or else).  These are the 10 routers we sell. Which one do you want.

    Heck you can go in buy and brand new Macbook Pro, go home and be surprised it doesn't connect to your brand new iPhone or iPad.  Off to the store again.  

    All these things may sound trivial but this is no longer the Apple I know.   Everything takes back seat to the iPhone and they are completely neglecting or misunderstanding there core markets.  When the iPhone gravy train is over, their will be nothing left to fall back on.  In 30+ years, I've never seen Apple in such disarray.
    Many ISPs combine the modem/router into a single device. Therefore an additional router isn't needed. 

    Plus Apple doesn't sell modems either or is an ISP. So the consumer should be smart enough to get that on their own. 
    It's also quite possible that Apple has plans for a HomeKit device that would handle router duties, or even, an Apple TV that does the same.

    Maybe the problem is that a router, as a singular device, doesn't fit the ecosystem anymore.
    Here's the thing: the original assertion is essentially that AAPL has lost its mojo. This is the conclusion of an analyst based on the evidence at hand. WRT to the airports, we've seen nothing new in some years while at the same time the wifi standards and drive technologies have significantly moved forward (as have the cable modem standards.) It very well could be that the old airports don't fit the ecosystem (like the cinema display that was dropped) but AAPL's secrecy notwithstanding, we've no evidence they are interested in these consumer items anymore. Alexa and HeyGoogle seem to be useful, but you can have Siri on your wrist at all times. Yet I can go to Amazon, click buy, and get and Echo Dot with devices it works with delivered to my door. Try that with AAPL. There's an app for third party vendors etc etc. My wemo will never work with HomeKit. Sucks to be me.

    So...the saavy consumer (e.g. the people that populate this site) winds up asking "with $200B in the bank, why can't Apple make a cable modem/wifi router/SSD time machine with a BT interface (for AW/iOS and Siri)? We've absolutely no evidence they will, and in fact the evidence is they don't want to make or continue what would be a very useful device.

    But "the future of TV is apps." OK, fine. Great. But this misses the point: people *expect* content, and they want choices and fair prices. Apps (so far) have not made that possible. The conclusion is "Apple...you're not solving a problem that is important to me." That's roughly "not innovating."
    jingo
  • Reply 103 of 200
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,709member
    blastdoor said:

    sog35 said:
    jungmark said:
    blastdoor said:
    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. 
    Apple includes an adapter to use with any wired headphones. Other wireless headphones can be used. 
    People don't want to use adapters.

    They are inconvenient, get lost, and are ugly. No one wants to lug around an adapter everywhere they go. Funny the people defending these adapters are the same people who tease Android users for lugging around SD cards and spare batteries.
    Exactly. Adapters shouldn't be necessary for core functionality. 

    The best argument for removing the audio jack is that it's no longer necessary, given the totally awesome wireless audio solution. When the totally awesome wireless solution isn't there, it kind of undermines the argument. And frankly at this point we don't really even know for sure that the AirPods are a totally awesome solution -- we just hope that they are. 
    That's why they included a pair of lighting headphones. For many users, that's fine. 
  • Reply 104 of 200
    flaneur said:

    altivec88 said:
    flaneur said:
    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.
    You are ignorant of any material reasons for Apple's moves. Example: tell us where Apple would get an extra 3 million or so 27" IGZO-backed  LCD screens to supply a new line of Cinema Displays. You can't tell us. Ergo, you are full of . . . hot air.
    LOL... I am ignorant because you believe that Apple is not capable of getting 3 million display panels?  So they are able to source out hundreds of millions of iPhone displays but Apple doesn't have enough clout or money to contract out 3 million 27" panels.     Yah... I'm the ignorant one.

    Am I also ignorant on the 3+ year old MacPro's?   How will Apple be able to source out the Xeon E5's that have been updated two times and the countless new graphics cards that are out?   How will they be able to source out enough USB-C ports for the MacPro.  I know its crazy for me to think that they are capable of getting these parts.
    Even more ignorant than I thought. IPhone screens are LTPS based, not IGZO. Entirely different technology, different sources.
    Wow.  give it up dude.  You obviously seem to have trouble comprehending dialog.   The point was not to compare an iPhone screen to a 27" panel, it was that Apple is big enough to get what ever they need.   BTW my ignorance is getting in the way of knowing what kind of panel goes in those 5k iMacs they're currently selling and how in the world were they able to obtain them.   Man, there is absolutely no way they can stick those same panels in a iMac frame with out the computer.   The sheer demand of these monitors would bring Apple to its knees and then they would have to stop making iPhones because they would have to spend all their time begging manufactures to make 27" panels instead.  They also won't be able to update their iMacs in a timely fashion.  Oh wait.  I finally got it.   The desktops can't be updated because Apple must secretly hoard enough 27" IGZO panels for them to release new iMacs.  Well, thank God they cancelled the monitor then.

    It really takes a big man to go on the internet and make personal attacks on people.
  • Reply 105 of 200
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member
    sog35 said:
    okay, look I'm a critic of Tim Cook

    but come on. This idiot ANALyst thinks he can predict what Apple will be in a decade? 
    I mean WTF.  These assholes can't even predict what sales will be in the next 90 days.

    This is the kind of crap Jobs would never put up with. This guy would have been chewed out by now.
    But Timid Timmy won't do a thing and continue to allow the Apple Brand and Name to be abused and violated and humilated in the press for all to see.
    The sad thing is the big investors believe these so-called analysts. The big investors are putting all their money into Amazon, Alphabet, Facebook and Microsoft because they believe those are the hottest companies doing all the things that consumers want from a company. You can easily see how many stories are going around telling about how the Microsoft Surface Pro and Microsoft Surface Studio are much better hardware than what Apple is building and Microsoft is essentially a software company.  I'm sure there will be stories of how great some new Windows 10 smartphone is much, much better than all iPhones ever built.  It's just crazy how the internet distorts things.

    There are constant stories on the internet tearing down Apple and their products in every possible way. I'm concerned more investors are going to drop Apple and even potential investors will head for the hills. There's absolutely no one backing Apple anymore. Apple used to be the 800 lb. gorilla in the room. Now, it's become a joke of a company where the belief is any half-assed company can kick Apple's butt without so much as breathing hard. That's some really bad opinion of a good company.  As a loyal Apple user, I consider it a humiliation that really should never have happened.  Apple is on top but not taking any advantage of its position despite a mountain-load of cash.  Not one bit of damage control from Apple.  It's really pathetic.
    And you're making yourself part of the problem. Apple is already doing damage control via Phil Schiller, for example, but you hand-wringers are not listening.

    The problem is that Apple has become so deep into detail in refining their various platforms that they've moved beyond the capacity of internet "critics" to understand. They just released laptops that make everyone else's look like junk, but they're in chassis designed for better processors not yet released. They're excellent right now, destined to be better, but the true, detailed brilliance of these machines is greater than the minds of the whining critics can absorb. Many examples in this thread, especially the "critic" you're having a dialog with right now. It's all way beyond sog's ability to comprehend.
    edited December 2016 ai46
  • Reply 106 of 200
    Anyway, let's go back to the article, or to the analyst's memo. Since no one has cared about it, we've dived into many different deeper issues. What the analyst says is very simple: "Apple lacks the courage to lead the next generation of innovation" What is that "next generation of innovation" we'll see. Please note that the analyst is not interested in every innovation, he's very selective, he's just involved with the "next generation of innovation". Which is...

    AI, cloud-based services, messaging

    Now take your time to digest this.

    Apple must lead the AI, Apple must lead cloud-based services, Apple must lead messaging. This is what the analyst says. So, Apple must be a services company, not a hardware company. In order to be a leader in a market you must devout all your resources to that market, obviously.

    So, stop your urge to discuss Apple's innovation within the context of this article, the article and the title will not reflect what is discussed in this thread.
    canukstormbrucemc
  • Reply 107 of 200
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member

    blastdoor said:

    sog35 said:
    jungmark said:
    blastdoor said:
    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. 
    Apple includes an adapter to use with any wired headphones. Other wireless headphones can be used. 
    People don't want to use adapters.

    They are inconvenient, get lost, and are ugly. No one wants to lug around an adapter everywhere they go. Funny the people defending these adapters are the same people who tease Android users for lugging around SD cards and spare batteries.
    Exactly. Adapters shouldn't be necessary for core functionality. 

    The best argument for removing the audio jack is that it's no longer necessary, given the totally awesome wireless audio solution. When the totally awesome wireless solution isn't there, it kind of undermines the argument. And frankly at this point we don't really even know for sure that the AirPods are a totally awesome solution -- we just hope that they are. 
    So make sure you get all your whining in before they come out, just in case they're great.
    ai46
  • Reply 108 of 200

    altivec88 said:
    altivec88 said:

    Skylake E5 (v5) is expected 1H 2017 and it comes with a new socket design. So updating the Mac Pro any time before 1H 2017 and have to go to a major redesign for the new socket in 1H 2017 would make no sense. Processor specs are listed in Intel's site and a comparison of all v3, v4 and incoming v5 specs would give some clue about why Apple did not update the Mac Pro. This is not as simple as counting the number of cores. Companies' marketing pages would not help you. You must dig deeper.
    I understand that the v5 will be a new socket design and require a redesign of the logic board but that does not refute the fact that the v3 and v4 are the same socket design and would require trivial work to implement. If they would have done an incremental update on the MacPro, they wouldn't be so hard pressed to get the v5 out the door. 

    I know its easy for all of us to quarterback CEO these things when it doesn't affect us.  The problem for me and many pros, is that this is are livelihood.   We have 7 year old 12 core systems that we use for rendering that are giving out one by one.   They NEED to be replaced.   Normally, we would have updated these systems every 2 years but Apple has not provided us with any compelling systems during this 7 year time frame.  If I can't walk into an Apple Store and buy a top of the line system that is even remotely close to what competitors are selling for the same price, you know there is a problem.

    I'm not sure where I am suppose to dig or how I am fooled by marketing that a 36 core E5v4 with Nvidia Quadro GPU Dell/HP is only marginally faster than the 12 core E5v2 with 3 year old D700 GPU.  Can you please point me in the right direction so I can see for myself.
    https://ark.intel.com Use the search box.

    Edit: there is a specific link for AMD in Mac Pro:

    http://www.amd.com/en-us/solutions/professional/partner/apple?utm_campaign=www.amd.com_en-us_solutions_professional_d-series&utm_medium=redirect&utm_source=301
    Okay... I checked your links out but other than explaining the products or showing detailed specs in a comparison chart, there is nothing telling me how they actually compare in performance.  Let me give it a try.  Here is a link to some Cinebench scores (a widely used benchmark for those of us who use our machines for renderings)

    https://us.rebusfarm.net/en/tempbench?view=benchmark

    As you can see, a 36 core E5 will easily trounce and 12 core one.  I can't see any logical reason to claim otherwise.  Now if the price were disproportionate, thats one thing, but I can get both systems for the same price.   I don't mind paying a little for the Apple Tax, but this is beyond ridiculous.

    Clearly Apple's decision to go with one processor over two will never allow them to compete on performance.  Although, I am not happy with that decision, I can live with it as long as they are at least someone competitive on price.   Right now they are not even close in either regard.
    Reducing the price for that single reason is not Apple's tradition, that would put their whole price consistency at stakes. Apple reduces prices on previous models when new products are released. We'll see whether that will apply to Mac Pro.

    Getting a correct clue through these documents requires a considerable effort. A rough comparison by Intel's Compare button shows not much difference between v2 and v4 chips except the number of cores. But Apple being both an OS developer and a chip producer, can easily leverage that number of cores difference with the operating system. The Mach kernel is capable of that. Add to this Metal, that makes the dual AMD FirePro sing, then the Mac Pro is not in a bad situation at all. The benchmarks must be performed on real machines with the same pro software at work. This is where the power or weakness of Mac Pro can be revealed.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 109 of 200
    kamilton said:
    macOS and iOS, Watch and TV OSs are beautifully poised for incredible explosions in new directions.  AI and Augmented innovations are also ripe.  I still think we'll see a whole new era of innovation in 2017.  The chess pieces are almost in position. God, all this R&D must be in pursuit of big things.  Tim is many things, but he doesn't seem like a good liar.  I don't think he's bluffing.

    That said, if we don't see at least one new product home run by Sept 2018, then we have a demonstrated post-Jobs decline and Cook will get a vote of no confidence from investors.  Be out by then.

    .
    the next big things for Apple are wearables (ie: health / identity), AR, transportation
  • Reply 110 of 200
    Anyway, let's go back to the article, or to the analyst's memo. Since no one has cared about it, we've dived into many different deeper issues. What the analyst says is very simple: "Apple lacks the courage to lead the next generation of innovation" What is that "next generation of innovation" we'll see. Please note that the analyst is not interested in every innovation, he's very selective, he's just involved with the "next generation of innovation". Which is...

    AI, cloud-based services, messaging

    Now take your time to digest this.

    Apple must lead the AI, Apple must lead cloud-based services, Apple must lead messaging. This is what the analyst says. So, Apple must be a services company, not a hardware company. In order to be a leader in a market you must devout all your resources to that market, obviously.

    So, stop your urge to discuss Apple's innovation within the context of this article, the article and the title will not reflect what is discussed in this thread.
    Sorry man... I disagree with you.  If your logic is correct, then Apple can only be good at one thing.  It they want to do the best laptop, it means they can't make the best phone.  They want to make the best phone then they can't make the best tablet... etc.

    They should be striving to be the best at everything they do.   Its not like they have one person working there.  They have teams assigned to each department and if the head of that department is not striving to be the absolute best in the field, then they shouldn't be there.   Its not like they lack the talent or financial resources to do this.  Mediocrity is not a formula for success.
    jas99
  • Reply 111 of 200
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member
    altivec88 said:
    flaneur said:

    altivec88 said:
    flaneur said:
    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.
    You are ignorant of any material reasons for Apple's moves. Example: tell us where Apple would get an extra 3 million or so 27" IGZO-backed  LCD screens to supply a new line of Cinema Displays. You can't tell us. Ergo, you are full of . . . hot air.
    LOL... I am ignorant because you believe that Apple is not capable of getting 3 million display panels?  So they are able to source out hundreds of millions of iPhone displays but Apple doesn't have enough clout or money to contract out 3 million 27" panels.     Yah... I'm the ignorant one.

    Am I also ignorant on the 3+ year old MacPro's?   How will Apple be able to source out the Xeon E5's that have been updated two times and the countless new graphics cards that are out?   How will they be able to source out enough USB-C ports for the MacPro.  I know its crazy for me to think that they are capable of getting these parts.
    Even more ignorant than I thought. IPhone screens are LTPS based, not IGZO. Entirely different technology, different sources.
    Wow.  give it up dude.  You obviously seem to have trouble comprehending dialog.   The point was not to compare an iPhone screen to a 27" panel, it was that Apple is big enough to get what ever they need.   BTW my ignorance is getting in the way of knowing what kind of panel goes in those 5k iMacs they're currently selling and how in the world were they able to obtain them.   Man, there is absolutely no way they can stick those same panels in a iMac frame with out the computer.   The sheer demand of these monitors would bring Apple to its knees and then they would have to stop making iPhones because they would have to spend all their time begging manufactures to make 27" panels instead.  They also won't be able to update their iMacs in a timely fashion.  Oh wait.  I finally got it.   The desktops can't be updated because Apple must secretly hoard enough 27" IGZO panels for them to release new iMacs.  Well, thank God they cancelled the monitor then.

    It really takes a big man to go on the internet and make personal attacks on people.
    You cavil at Apple out of ignorance, adding to the perceptual problem under discussion, you get a personal atrack from me. You assume that Apple can get all the IGZO monitors they need for monitors and just crank them out. Show us that LG, the only supplier at present, can do so.

    It's got nothing to do with phones. It's got to do with LG. Show us. The basic problem is that you guys are trying to say you know how Apple should run its business, and are willing to prognosticate decline and doom on it, and you don't know shit. I and many others get tired of this constant negative armchair CEO-ing. If you know something about display technology and LG's production, fine. But you don't. Don't assume you know enough to add to Apple's perceived problems.

    edited December 2016 ai46tmay
  • Reply 112 of 200
    Anyway, let's go back to the article, or to the analyst's memo. Since no one has cared about it, we've dived into many different deeper issues. What the analyst says is very simple: "Apple lacks the courage to lead the next generation of innovation" What is that "next generation of innovation" we'll see. Please note that the analyst is not interested in every innovation, he's very selective, he's just involved with the "next generation of innovation". Which is...

    AI, cloud-based services, messaging

    Now take your time to digest this.

    Apple must lead the AI, Apple must lead cloud-based services, Apple must lead messaging. This is what the analyst says. So, Apple must be a services company, not a hardware company. In order to be a leader in a market you must devout all your resources to that market, obviously.

    So, stop your urge to discuss Apple's innovation within the context of this article, the article and the title will not reflect what is discussed in this thread.
    well said. Wall Street has been banging that drum of "Apple needs to be a services company in order to survive long-term" for years. They've never been a fan of hardware companies of the likes of Apple.
    jas99
  • Reply 113 of 200
    altivec88 said:
    Anyway, let's go back to the article, or to the analyst's memo. Since no one has cared about it, we've dived into many different deeper issues. What the analyst says is very simple: "Apple lacks the courage to lead the next generation of innovation" What is that "next generation of innovation" we'll see. Please note that the analyst is not interested in every innovation, he's very selective, he's just involved with the "next generation of innovation". Which is...

    AI, cloud-based services, messaging

    Now take your time to digest this.

    Apple must lead the AI, Apple must lead cloud-based services, Apple must lead messaging. This is what the analyst says. So, Apple must be a services company, not a hardware company. In order to be a leader in a market you must devout all your resources to that market, obviously.

    So, stop your urge to discuss Apple's innovation within the context of this article, the article and the title will not reflect what is discussed in this thread.
    Sorry man... I disagree with you.  If your logic is correct, then Apple can only be good at one thing.  It they want to do the best laptop, it means they can't make the best phone.  They want to make the best phone then they can't make the best tablet... etc.

    They should be striving to be the best at everything they do.   Its not like they have one person working there.  They have teams assigned to each department and if the head of that department is not striving to be the absolute best in the field, then they shouldn't be there.   Its not like they lack the talent or financial resources to do this.  Mediocrity is not a formula for success.
    Apple is a hardware company and it will remain so. If by "be good at one thing" you mean that, yes it is expected to be good in that one thing only. All other goodnesses (software, services) will serve to that one good.

    And Apple has successfully achieved this since many years. Apple is under no obligation to serve or compete in Android or Windows platforms. As Apple users we have iCloud, iMessage, Siri, Apple Music, iTunes. Are they perfect? Maybe not but Apple listens to us and commits to serve us. I don't want Apple serve the customers of competing hardware products and competing operating systems.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 114 of 200
    Whilst Apple products are still streets ahead of the competitor "alternatives" I do feel they are losing their polish somewhat and sw is becoming too complex. Apple need to simplify products so they feel magical not technical.

    anantksundaram
  • Reply 115 of 200
    flaneur said:
    altivec88 said:
    flaneur said:

    altivec88 said:
    flaneur said:
    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.
    You are ignorant of any material reasons for Apple's moves. Example: tell us where Apple would get an extra 3 million or so 27" IGZO-backed  LCD screens to supply a new line of Cinema Displays. You can't tell us. Ergo, you are full of . . . hot air.
    LOL... I am ignorant because you believe that Apple is not capable of getting 3 million display panels?  So they are able to source out hundreds of millions of iPhone displays but Apple doesn't have enough clout or money to contract out 3 million 27" panels.     Yah... I'm the ignorant one.

    Am I also ignorant on the 3+ year old MacPro's?   How will Apple be able to source out the Xeon E5's that have been updated two times and the countless new graphics cards that are out?   How will they be able to source out enough USB-C ports for the MacPro.  I know its crazy for me to think that they are capable of getting these parts.
    Even more ignorant than I thought. IPhone screens are LTPS based, not IGZO. Entirely different technology, different sources.
    Wow.  give it up dude.  You obviously seem to have trouble comprehending dialog.   The point was not to compare an iPhone screen to a 27" panel, it was that Apple is big enough to get what ever they need.   BTW my ignorance is getting in the way of knowing what kind of panel goes in those 5k iMacs they're currently selling and how in the world were they able to obtain them.   Man, there is absolutely no way they can stick those same panels in a iMac frame with out the computer.   The sheer demand of these monitors would bring Apple to its knees and then they would have to stop making iPhones because they would have to spend all their time begging manufactures to make 27" panels instead.  They also won't be able to update their iMacs in a timely fashion.  Oh wait.  I finally got it.   The desktops can't be updated because Apple must secretly hoard enough 27" IGZO panels for them to release new iMacs.  Well, thank God they cancelled the monitor then.

    It really takes a big man to go on the internet and make personal attacks on people.
    You cavil at Apple out of ignorance, adding to the perceptual problem under discussion, you get a personal atrack from me. You assume that Apple can get all the IGZO monitors they need for monitors and just crank them out. Show us that LG, the only supplier at present, can do so.

    It's got nothing to do with phones. It's got to do with LG. Show us. The basic problem is that you guys are trying to say you know how Apple should run its business, and are willing to prognosticate decline and doom on it, and you don't know shit. I and m  any others get tired of this constant negative armchair CEO-ing. If you know something about display technology and LG's production, fine. But you don't. Don't assume you know enough to add to Apple's perceived problems.

    I have been able to provide you with fact that Apple is able to obtain 27" IGZO panels as they are what they use in their iMacs.  Fact 2, Monitors are not a high demand product so in no way would it constrain iMacs at this time especially that they were able to provide iMacs at peak introduction rates.   Fact 3, Releasing a TB3 monitor would only allow it to work on two current models at this time further reducing demand.  Fact 4, Apple teamed up with LG to sell monitors.  So if LG is able to make enough panels for this purpose, that means there are enough panels in existence for this purpose.  Fact 5, I've never seen Apple shy away from the problem of too much demand for something.  They just make you wait.

    So.  I've offered you five facts to counter your reason that I'm ignorant because Apple is not able to get enough 27" IGZO panels to make a cinema display yet you have not provided me with anything other than insults.  You don't have to agree with my opinion but to start name calling and personal attacks because you disagree just shows off your character.  You feel your personal attacks are justified because you are tired of arm-chair CEOing on a public forum with a topic about Apple being mis-managed.  All I can say to that is Wow.
    blastdoor
  • Reply 116 of 200
    aderutter said:
    Whilst Apple products are still streets ahead of the competitor "alternatives" I do feel they are losing their polish somewhat and sw is becoming too complex. Apple need to simplify products so they feel magical not technical.

    If you feel so, then submit your feedback straight to Apple. Sometimes Apple stops innovating and commits on polishing and fine tuning. iOS 8 was such an update. Maybe iOS 10 too. Apple has discontinued Aperture and implemented its mainstream features into Photos app, which is much more easier to use and free. But people got enraged again...
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 117 of 200
    altivec88 said:
    Anyway, let's go back to the article, or to the analyst's memo. Since no one has cared about it, we've dived into many different deeper issues. What the analyst says is very simple: "Apple lacks the courage to lead the next generation of innovation" What is that "next generation of innovation" we'll see. Please note that the analyst is not interested in every innovation, he's very selective, he's just involved with the "next generation of innovation". Which is...

    AI, cloud-based services, messaging

    Now take your time to digest this.

    Apple must lead the AI, Apple must lead cloud-based services, Apple must lead messaging. This is what the analyst says. So, Apple must be a services company, not a hardware company. In order to be a leader in a market you must devout all your resources to that market, obviously.

    So, stop your urge to discuss Apple's innovation within the context of this article, the article and the title will not reflect what is discussed in this thread.
    Sorry man... I disagree with you.  If your logic is correct, then Apple can only be good at one thing.  It they want to do the best laptop, it means they can't make the best phone.  They want to make the best phone then they can't make the best tablet... etc.

    They should be striving to be the best at everything they do.   Its not like they have one person working there.  They have teams assigned to each department and if the head of that department is not striving to be the absolute best in the field, then they shouldn't be there.   Its not like they lack the talent or financial resources to do this.  Mediocrity is not a formula for success.
    Apple is a hardware company and it will remain so. If by "be good at one thing" you mean that, yes it is expected to be good in that one thing only. All other goodnesses (software, services) will serve to that one good.

    And Apple has successfully achieved this since many years. Apple is under no obligation to serve or compete in Android or Windows platforms. As Apple users we have iCloud, iMessage, Siri, Apple Music, iTunes. Are they perfect? Maybe not but Apple listens to us and commits to serve us. I don't want Apple serve the customers of competing hardware products and competing operating systems.
    So what you are saying is that Apple should only be expected to be the best of class at either software or hardware.  I am having a hard time figuring out which one that is?  You suggest hardware.   Look at the purchase recommendation of their mac products.  http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac.   

    Now if you want to call "hardware" only the iPhone and exclude everything else, then yes they are best in class.  I don't call that a hardware company though, I call that a one trick pony phone company.

    I think its important to be best in class or close to it in all areas, especially in new technologies such as AI/VR/AR.  You never know when that one thing becomes the tipping point for people to switch to another product no matter how good your hardware is.  Everyone switched to the iPhone because touch became the revolution.  If another platform all of sudden has the AI that cleans my house and cooks dinner for me, I'm out of here.


  • Reply 118 of 200
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,789member
    99.99999999% of Apple customers do not read this forum, read Wall Street analysts opinions on technology or even know a tenth of what their iPhone or Mac is capable of. Apple knows a lot more about their customers than the armchair experts on these forums.

    I'm just thankful that my Apple products last for a long time, especially the Macs which provide me with a very nice six figure income doing design and publishing. I have nothing to complain about.
    edited December 2016 StrangeDays
  • Reply 119 of 200
    volcan said:
    99.99999999% of Apple customers do not read this forum, read Wall Street analysts opinions on technology or even know a tenth of what their iPhone or Mac is capable of. Apple knows a lot more about their customers and than the armchair experts on these forums.

    I'm just thankful that my Apple products last for a long time and especially the Macs which provide me with a very nice six figure income doing design and publishing. I have nothing to complain about.
    I never use to complain about anything either and was quite happy trucking along too.  Most people won't see it or care to see it until it affects them directly.  I'm not sure which machine you use to do your design and publishing, but if its a MacPro and you need to replace it because your MacPro dies tomorrow, you will quickly learn that a new one is severely over priced and 3+ years out of date compared to what the competition is selling.   At that time, we will welcome you with open arms to the ever growing Armchair CEO forum, so that you can gripe like the rest of us.
    avon b7
  • Reply 120 of 200

    This is from a GoPro Bearish Analyst 

    suddenly newton
Sign In or Register to comment.