If Alphabet or Amazon had numbers like Apple had, their stock prices would have risen about 10%. Seriously, Wall Street is definitely biased. I'm not complaining because I was definitely worried Apple's stock price would tank on earnings. A three percent rise is practically a godsend. I'm just looking forward to another dividend hike even if the stock doesn't perform as well as other major tech companies do. Now if Apple could just get some cloud business which Wall Street worships so much. I'll never understand how all companies in the cloud business can do well when there will be so much competition. It's seems everything Apple doesn't get into is considered an unlimited growth business but when Apple gets into it they'll claim the cloud business is already too saturated.
Dude, Apple is up almost 30% in the last 6 months. Stop crying like a baby.
Ironic post of the year... and the year is just getting started!
What's your take on 'the majority of sales were to non-Mac users'?
My take is that the "majority" could potentially cover any figure between fifty-one and ninety-nine per cent.
So for all you know, anything up to forty-nine per cent went to existing Mac users.
But if Apple increased sales then whichever way you look at it, it demonstrates that they know their target market better than you do, possibly because you're not in it.
If Alphabet or Amazon had numbers like Apple had, their stock prices would have risen about 10%. Seriously, Wall Street is definitely biased. I'm not complaining because I was definitely worried Apple's stock price would tank on earnings. A three percent rise is practically a godsend. I'm just looking forward to another dividend hike even if the stock doesn't perform as well as other major tech companies do. Now if Apple could just get some cloud business which Wall Street worships so much. I'll never understand how all companies in the cloud business can do well when there will be so much competition. It's seems everything Apple doesn't get into is considered an unlimited growth business but when Apple gets into it they'll claim the cloud business is already too saturated.
Dude, Apple is up almost 30% in the last 6 months. Stop crying like a baby.
Ironic post of the year... and the year is just getting started!
I'm looking for $150 with the iPhoneX hype train coming near the end of this year.
I think it's a little misleading when analysts like Horacio Dediu put up charts about Apple's "services" revenue with comments like ' who says Apple can't do services'. OK the majority of Apple's services revenues come from App Store downloads. I don't think that's what people are complaining about when they say Apple doesn't do "services" well. The increase in revenue from App Store downloads masks the real problems Apple has and has historically has with services.
Certainly it helps to understand what's included in a given category when assessing what given results mean, I'd agree with you on that point. And a large portion of that Services revenue is not from the kinds of services that you (I think correctly) refer to as what people often complain about.
That said, App Store revenue doesn't make up most of the Services revenue that Apple reports. It does, however, make up a large portion of it. They didn't state explicitly what their App Store revenue was, but from other things Mr. Cook said (and things we already now about how Services revenue is reported) we can reasonably conclude that it was likely in the $2 billion - $3 billion range.
Mr. Maestri did indicate that the App Store was driving significant growth in Services revenue, App Store revenue was up 43% YoY on a 13 weeks versus 13 weeks basis.
I think it's a little misleading when analysts like Horacio Dediu put up charts about Apple's "services" revenue with comments like ' who says Apple can't do services'. OK the majority of Apple's services revenues come from App Store downloads. I don't think that's what people are complaining about when they say Apple doesn't do "services" well. The increase in revenue from App Store downloads masks the real problems Apple has and has historically has with services.
Nice try.
But Apple is a growing services monster. Their services revenue is bigger than the entire Facebook empire.
Apple has over 150,000,000 paid subscriptions on their services empire. In less than 2 years they are #2 in streaming music and #1 in total music revenues. And this is only the beginning.
Cook said in 4 years their services revenue will DOUBLE. That means over $50 billion in services revenue. Wow.
You can down play it all you want but Apple Services is a monster.
That paid subscriptions number is impressive. But just to be clear, that isn't all from Apple's own service offerings, e.g. Apple Music. That includes their handling of subscription payments for others, e.g. Netflix and HBO.
Mac sales on the typically HIGHER END @ 5.4 million units.
Take note, folks.
Yes, though I do wish Apple would shit or get off the pot with the Mac Pro. Just stop making the product if it's too difficult to manufacturer or isn't worth the resources.
I'm not sure what to make of the product cycles data. Apple can seemingly be very successful with an annual iPhone refresh. There was even a direct question about this on the call yesterday - how much "runway" the iPhone might have. My guess is the Best and Brightest at Apple are all on the iPhone team. Tim said there were still many upgrade features in the pipeline.
But there's a lot of speculation about why iPad sales are down YoY. I just recently updated my wife's iPad 2 to a iPad Pro, and I still use the original iPad mini. I'm pretty much an outlier on this, but Gruber's take on this at DaringFireball seems correct - the iPad simply doesn't need replacing as often. And really, neither does iPhone, but people are sort of...used to...making that update on their device they use every moment of the day. Not sure what this might mean to AppleWatch. iPhone 7 is the first launch day iPhone I bought. I like it. But it is unlikely I'll buy the next one, as I tend to skip a few cycles.
Macs are a completely different beast. The Mac Pro is the go-to device for many professionals, but is the current one good enough for them? Maybe. But making one that is upgradeable seems to limit the number of units you can sell in the future, and maybe that isn't as important as satisfying customers that use them. Again, I can't speak from experience, as I use a late 2009 27" iMac as a desktop, and I'm completely fine with it (upgrading the HD this weekend!) But I don't use my mac for professional video, music, image, photographic professional creation. I simply don't need a new mac....but I think many pros do.
I'll bet this is one of the strategies Apple really struggles with. Could they update the Mac Pro every year? Sure. What would that do to the bottom line? Murky.
What's your take on 'the majority of sales were to non-Mac users'?
My take is that the "majority" could potentially cover any figure between fifty-one and ninety-nine per cent.
So for all you know, anything up to forty-nine per cent went to existing Mac users.
But if Apple increased sales then whichever way you look at it, it demonstrates that they know their target market better than you do, possibly because you're not in it.
My take is that when they gave guidance for the quarter they weren't banking on selling more Macs to non-Mac users than Mac users. Especially with a major laptop upgrade in the equation. That might suggest that a huge amount of Mac users are MIA.
Difficult to gauge but I'd say that there was potential to dramatically increase sales over what they actually managed.
Oh wait. Can we stop with 14 weeks vs 13 weeks BS? Up is up, down is down (according to media, stock analysts, shareholder, pundits, haters, etc.) - stop making excuses. No one gave a damn (with their constant Apple is Doom theory) when Apple missed their numbers from 14w to 13w, why now it's important to point out that Apple increase sales is due to 14w.
I think it's a little misleading when analysts like Horacio Dediu put up charts about Apple's "services" [snip]
Let me stop you there.
No no one in their right mind is going to take your opinion over Horace Dediu.
exactly.
IMO, Horace is the best Apple analysist in the world.
People here should listen to his podcast 'Critical Path'
Unlike most analysist this guy actually worked in the field for many years. Dude brought up the potential of Apple services 4 years ago when no one else saw it coming.
Asymco Stratechery Above Avalon
If you want proper analysis on Apple numbers, then those sites are where you go. It's no accident that these sites charge for their best stuff; decent analysis takes time and thinking to put together.
Oh wait. Can we stop with 14 weeks vs 13 weeks BS? Up is up, down is down (according to media, stock analysts, shareholder, pundits, haters, etc.) - stop making excuses. No one gave a damn (with their constant Apple is Doom theory) when Apple missed their numbers from 14w to 13w, why now it's important to point out that Apple increase sales is due to 14w.
It's important because it fits the narrative that Apple is failing, and the reason that people want the company to fail falls into three broad areas:
Android fans – nuff said. Ex-Apple fans who move to Android but keep coming back because they lack the confidence to stick with their decision without trying to convince others they were right. Current Apple fans who need Apple to fail so they will turn back the clock and start making machines for a shrinking (and dying, let's face it) group of customers.
Here's next year's meme for you:
"Yeah, Apple's sales went through the roof again, but if you take away all the sales they made in India…"
Seriously, people here are going to post that nonsense. They did it a few years back:
"Yeah, but if you take China out of the equation, then their sales weren't that great."
What's your take on 'the majority of sales were to non-Mac users'?
My take is that the "majority" could potentially cover any figure between fifty-one and ninety-nine per cent.
So for all you know, anything up to forty-nine per cent went to existing Mac users.
But if Apple increased sales then whichever way you look at it, it demonstrates that they know their target market better than you do, possibly because you're not in it.
My take is that when they gave guidance for the quarter they weren't banking on selling more Macs to non-Mac users than Mac users. Especially with a major laptop upgrade in the equation. That might suggest that a huge amount of Mac users are MIA.
Difficult to gauge but I'd say that there was potential to dramatically increase sales over what they actually managed.
"Might"?
You're working too hard to find something that will prove that Apple was wrong in it's design decisions with the Mac.
But without any figures, you’re kinda just guessing, and so am I.
But for the sake of argument, let's assume that what you hope to be true is true: all the new Macs went to new customers. This would reinforce your hope that Apple's old customers have abandoned the Mac because it doesn't have ports or whatever, and of course, ignoring the other popular meme of the day that this is just pent up demand from the existing user base.
But the problem is that mac sales increased, both numbers and revenue.
If you are correct then it just proves what I've been saying for weeks; Apple is simply shifting its focus to a new, younger, more flexible market that will give them more benefits in the long term. From their point of view, there is no point in servicing a shrinking user base. Their sales went up; that's the result, and even if Apple didn't see that coming (which I very much doubt given the pricing on the new models) then any sensible company would see that there is more potential in attracting new users than sticking with the older ones who are more focussed on holding the platform back than seeing it move forward.
I think it's a little misleading when analysts like Horacio Dediu put up charts about Apple's "services" revenue with comments like ' who says Apple can't do services'. OK the majority of Apple's services revenues come from App Store downloads. I don't think that's what people are complaining about when they say Apple doesn't do "services" well. The increase in revenue from App Store downloads masks the real problems Apple has and has historically has with services.
Nice try.
But Apple is a growing services monster. Their services revenue is bigger than the entire Facebook empire.
Apple has over 150,000,000 paid subscriptions on their services empire. In less than 2 years they are #2 in streaming music and #1 in total music revenues. And this is only the beginning.
Cook said in 4 years their services revenue will DOUBLE. That means over $50 billion in services revenue. Wow.
You can down play it all you want but Apple Services is a monster.
That paid subscriptions number is impressive. But just to be clear, that isn't all from Apple's own service offerings, e.g. Apple Music. That includes their handling of subscription payments for others, e.g. Netflix and HBO.
Yet another bogus argument.
Who in their right mind would look at Amazon's figures and then say:
"Well, they've done well, I guess; but if you take off all the stuff they sell but don't actually make themselves…"
Because by your weird logic, Amazon actually makes very little because most of the stuff they sell is actually made by other companies.
I think we're now scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for bad news here.
What's your take on 'the majority of sales were to non-Mac users'?
My take is that the "majority" could potentially cover any figure between fifty-one and ninety-nine per cent.
So for all you know, anything up to forty-nine per cent went to existing Mac users.
But if Apple increased sales then whichever way you look at it, it demonstrates that they know their target market better than you do, possibly because you're not in it.
My take is that when they gave guidance for the quarter they weren't banking on selling more Macs to non-Mac users than Mac users. Especially with a major laptop upgrade in the equation. That might suggest that a huge amount of Mac users are MIA.
Difficult to gauge but I'd say that there was potential to dramatically increase sales over what they actually managed.
"Might"?
You're working too hard to find something that will prove that Apple was wrong in it's design decisions with the Mac.
But without any figures, you’re kinda just guessing, and so am I.
But for the sake of argument, let's assume that what you hope to be true is true: all the new Macs went to new customers. This would reinforce your hope that Apple's old customers have abandoned the Mac because it doesn't have ports or whatever, and of course, ignoring the other popular meme of the day that this is just pent up demand from the existing user base.
But the problem is that mac sales increased, both numbers and revenue.
If you are correct then it just proves what I've been saying for weeks; Apple is simply shifting its focus to a new, younger, more flexible market that will give them more benefits in the long term. From their point of view, there is no point in servicing a shrinking user base. Their sales went up; that's the result, and even if Apple didn't see that coming (which I very much doubt given the pricing on the new models) then any sensible company would see that there is more potential in attracting new users than sticking with the older ones who are more focussed on holding the platform back than seeing it move forward.
I don't need to prove anything. I have my opinion and act on it. In my opinion Apple was more than wrong but I have no need to prove anyone wrong. That said, I will act on what I think and Apple lost the sale to me this time.
Also, I do not need to 'reinforce my hope' that Apple's customers have 'abandoned' the platform. That hope simply doesn't exist. I never said anyone abandoned anything.
In fact, I was probably the very first person to say that the only real way to have anything tangible was to wait for the Q1 results. I also clearly stated on numerous occasions that if they sold boatloads of the new MBPs then they wouldn't change track on design. That doesn't change my opinion though. It hasn't changed at all. If anything, I've seen more than enough examples of hardware tests failing and Apple replacing the entire machine with no attempt to repair it. My best wishes to any poor soul who needs repair out of warranty. It's not a position I want to be in for the asking price.
Users are users and the more the better IMO. However, your 'young and flexible' should have included 'fickle'.
'Might'? Yes of course. Guessing? That's all we or Apple can do but I'd say the idea of lost sales is not far off. Exactly why? Difficult call. You have me, who simply cannot afford a new MBP. I also refuse to buy because I detest the compromises that are bundled with it.
AFAIK Apple didn't mention how many new MBPs they sold. Am I correct on that (I haven't had time to listen to the call)? All I know is that supposedly the majority of Mac sales went to first time Mac buyers. Could that be a first for the company.
'Abandoning the platform'? Well, that didn't come from me but it certainly is a possibility. I have one foot out already. It wouldn't be crazy to think that others are in the same position. More logical would be to speculate that an enormous amount of Mac users simply skipped upgrading in the quarter. The possible reasons are varied but quite plausible:
Design decisions Price Repairability/upgradability Nothing new (save for MBPs) Currency fluctuations
Various of the above could have come into play (I'm absolutely certain that sales in the UK were affected by currency adjustments). Does that mean they are thinking about abandoning the platform? I'd say we have to wait for truly new iMacs before reaching that point or if the new MBPs get price cuts.
"Their sales went up; that's the result, and even if Apple didn't see that coming (which I very much doubt given the pricing on the new models)"
Are you saying that sales are up due to the new MBP in terms of unit sales?
For me it would be nice to know so I can plan for the future. If they sold in huge numbers there would be no point holding back any potential purchase. Another of my doubts was that they were heavily discounted shortly after release and I saw heavy discounts on the day of the earnings call too. It does seem a little strange if there are wait times.
Did they break the Mac numbers down (if only into desktop/laptop)?
I think it's a little misleading when analysts like Horacio Dediu put up charts about Apple's "services" revenue with comments like ' who says Apple can't do services'. OK the majority of Apple's services revenues come from App Store downloads. I don't think that's what people are complaining about when they say Apple doesn't do "services" well. The increase in revenue from App Store downloads masks the real problems Apple has and has historically has with services.
Nice try.
But Apple is a growing services monster. Their services revenue is bigger than the entire Facebook empire.
Apple has over 150,000,000 paid subscriptions on their services empire. In less than 2 years they are #2 in streaming music and #1 in total music revenues. And this is only the beginning.
Cook said in 4 years their services revenue will DOUBLE. That means over $50 billion in services revenue. Wow.
You can down play it all you want but Apple Services is a monster.
That paid subscriptions number is impressive. But just to be clear, that isn't all from Apple's own service offerings, e.g. Apple Music. That includes their handling of subscription payments for others, e.g. Netflix and HBO.
Yet another bogus argument.
Who in their right mind would look at Amazon's figures and then say:
"Well, they've done well, I guess; but if you take off all the stuff they sell but don't actually make themselves…"
Because by your weird logic, Amazon actually makes very little because most of the stuff they sell is actually made by other companies.
I think we're now scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for bad news here.
What bogus argument are you referring to? I'm not looking for bad news, I'm over the moon about Apple's results. I've posted many times (here and elsewhere) to point out the factors that make for favorable comparisons from the recent earnings report and call. And in the post you quoted above, I wasn't disparaging Apple's Services segment at all. I've been excited about their potential there for a long time, since long before Apple started emphasizing it and provided additional information about it a year ago.
There was a particular context to the post I made. Another poster - rogifan_new pointed out that growing Services revenue didn't necessarily refute the complaint that they and others have had about Apple not doing services well because those complaints weren't about most of the stuff that was counted in that Services revenue - their complaints or criticisms weren't about apps from the Apps Store or content from the iTunes Store or perhaps even the payment service that Apple offers to third-party service providers. The criticisms being referred to (not by me, but by others), it seems, were more about services that Apple provides itself. Sog35 responded with, among other things, information about paid subscriptions. I agreed that the paid subscriptions number was impressive but provided clarification in case some didn't know what that number actually referred to. In the context of that particular conversation that was a relevant clarification. If someone else's point is to distinguish between services that Apple actually provides itself (e.g. Apple Music or iCloud) and services which Apple just handles payments for or content and apps which are sold through Apple, then the distinction between those different kinds of services is certainly relevant. That was the point, it was based entirely on the point that rogifan_new was trying to make. And it didn't, btw, suggest that I agreed with rogifan_new's point. Regardless of whether I do, whether that paid subscription number represents (at all, mostly, or not at all) what they were referring to - what they were specifically trying to distinguish - matters to their point.
I think Apple's paid subscriptions business is great - whether it's about services they provide themselves or those which they handle billing for. I've seen the value for Apple in that kind of offering - that it was a big part of the value of the Apple ecosystem and building install base - for years. No one - not myself, anyway - is trying to diminish the importance of that aspect of what Apple does. You're reading something into my comments that just isn't there.
I think it's a little misleading when analysts like Horacio Dediu put up charts about Apple's "services" revenue with comments like ' who says Apple can't do services'. OK the majority of Apple's services revenues come from App Store downloads. I don't think that's what people are complaining about when they say Apple doesn't do "services" well. The increase in revenue from App Store downloads masks the real problems Apple has and has historically has with services.
Nice try.
But Apple is a growing services monster. Their services revenue is bigger than the entire Facebook empire.
Apple has over 150,000,000 paid subscriptions on their services empire. In less than 2 years they are #2 in streaming music and #1 in total music revenues. And this is only the beginning.
Cook said in 4 years their services revenue will DOUBLE. That means over $50 billion in services revenue. Wow.
You can down play it all you want but Apple Services is a monster.
That paid subscriptions number is impressive. But just to be clear, that isn't all from Apple's own service offerings, e.g. Apple Music. That includes their handling of subscription payments for others, e.g. Netflix and HBO.
Yet another bogus argument.
Who in their right mind would look at Amazon's figures and then say:
"Well, they've done well, I guess; but if you take off all the stuff they sell but don't actually make themselves…"
Because by your weird logic, Amazon actually makes very little because most of the stuff they sell is actually made by other companies.
I think we're now scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for bad news here.
What bogus argument are you referring to? I'm not looking for bad news, I'm over the moon about Apple's results. I've posted many times (here and elsewhere) to point out the factors that make for favorable comparisons from the recent earnings report and call. And in the post you quoted above, I wasn't disparaging Apple's Services segment at all. I've been excited about their potential there for a long time, since long before Apple started emphasizing it and provided additional information about it a year ago.
There was a particular context to the post I made. Another poster - rogifan_new pointed out that growing Services revenue didn't necessarily refute the complaint that they and others have had about Apple not doing services well because those complaints weren't about most of the stuff that was counted in that Services revenue - their complaints or criticisms weren't about apps from the Apps Store or content from the iTunes Store or perhaps even the payment service that Apple offers to third-party service providers. The criticisms being referred to (not by me, but by others), it seems, were more about services that Apple provides itself. Sog35 responded with, among other things, information about paid subscriptions. I agreed that the paid subscriptions number was impressive but provided clarification in case some didn't know what that number actually referred to. In the context of that particular conversation that was a relevant clarification. If someone else's point is to distinguish between services that Apple actually provides itself (e.g. Apple Music or iCloud) and services which Apple just handles payments for or content and apps which are sold through Apple, then the distinction between those different kinds of services is certainly relevant. That was the point, it was based entirely on the point that rogifan_new was trying to make. And it didn't, btw, suggest that I agreed with rogifan_new's point. Regardless of whether I do, whether that paid subscription number represents (at all, mostly, or not at all) what they were referring to - what they were specifically trying to distinguish - matters to their point.
I think Apple's paid subscriptions business is great - whether it's about services they provide themselves or those which they handle billing for. I've seen the value for Apple in that kind of offering - that it was a big part of the value of the Apple ecosystem and building install base - for years. No one - not myself, anyway - is trying to diminish the importance of that aspect of what Apple does. You're reading something into my comments that just isn't there.
Apple's music platform (streaming+downloads) is back to growth per Cook. Apple Music has over 20 million paid subs.
Cook said iCloud is growing powerfully. AppleCare is growing.
So again where is your proof that Apple provided services are struggling?
You may have quoted the wrong person. I haven't suggested that Apple provided services are struggling. My thoughts are quite to the contrary and I've suggested as much.
What's your take on 'the majority of sales were to non-Mac users'?
My take is that the "majority" could potentially cover any figure between fifty-one and ninety-nine per cent.
So for all you know, anything up to forty-nine per cent went to existing Mac users.
But if Apple increased sales then whichever way you look at it, it demonstrates that they know their target market better than you do, possibly because you're not in it.
My take is that when they gave guidance for the quarter they weren't banking on selling more Macs to non-Mac users than Mac users. Especially with a major laptop upgrade in the equation. That might suggest that a huge amount of Mac users are MIA.
Difficult to gauge but I'd say that there was potential to dramatically increase sales over what they actually managed.
"Might"?
You're working too hard to find something that will prove that Apple was wrong in it's design decisions with the Mac.
But without any figures, you’re kinda just guessing, and so am I.
But for the sake of argument, let's assume that what you hope to be true is true: all the new Macs went to new customers. This would reinforce your hope that Apple's old customers have abandoned the Mac because it doesn't have ports or whatever, and of course, ignoring the other popular meme of the day that this is just pent up demand from the existing user base.
But the problem is that mac sales increased, both numbers and revenue.
If you are correct then it just proves what I've been saying for weeks; Apple is simply shifting its focus to a new, younger, more flexible market that will give them more benefits in the long term. From their point of view, there is no point in servicing a shrinking user base. Their sales went up; that's the result, and even if Apple didn't see that coming (which I very much doubt given the pricing on the new models) then any sensible company would see that there is more potential in attracting new users than sticking with the older ones who are more focussed on holding the platform back than seeing it move forward.
I don't need to prove anything. I have my opinion and act on it. In my opinion Apple was more than wrong but I have no need to prove anyone wrong. That said, I will act on what I think and Apple lost the sale to me this time.
Also, I do not need to 'reinforce my hope' that Apple's customers have 'abandoned' the platform. That hope simply doesn't exist. I never said anyone abandoned anything.
In fact, I was probably the very first person to say that the only real way to have anything tangible was to wait for the Q1 results. I also clearly stated on numerous occasions that if they sold boatloads of the new MBPs then they wouldn't change track on design. That doesn't change my opinion though. It hasn't changed at all. If anything, I've seen more than enough examples of hardware tests failing and Apple replacing the entire machine with no attempt to repair it. My best wishes to any poor soul who needs repair out of warranty. It's not a position I want to be in for the asking price.
Users are users and the more the better IMO. However, your 'young and flexible' should have included 'fickle'.
'Might'? Yes of course. Guessing? That's all we or Apple can do but I'd say the idea of lost sales is not far off. Exactly why? Difficult call. You have me, who simply cannot afford a new MBP. I also refuse to buy because I detest the compromises that are bundled with it.
AFAIK Apple didn't mention how many new MBPs they sold. Am I correct on that (I haven't had time to listen to the call)? All I know is that supposedly the majority of Mac sales went to first time Mac buyers. Could that be a first for the company.
'Abandoning the platform'? Well, that didn't come from me but it certainly is a possibility. I have one foot out already. It wouldn't be crazy to think that others are in the same position. More logical would be to speculate that an enormous amount of Mac users simply skipped upgrading in the quarter. The possible reasons are varied but quite plausible:
Design decisions Price Repairability/upgradability Nothing new (save for MBPs) Currency fluctuations
Various of the above could have come into play (I'm absolutely certain that sales in the UK were affected by currency adjustments). Does that mean they are thinking about abandoning the platform? I'd say we have to wait for truly new iMacs before reaching that point or if the new MBPs get price cuts.
"Their sales went up; that's the result, and even if Apple didn't see that coming (which I very much doubt given the pricing on the new models)"
Are you saying that sales are up due to the new MBP in terms of unit sales?
For me it would be nice to know so I can plan for the future. If they sold in huge numbers there would be no point holding back any potential purchase. Another of my doubts was that they were heavily discounted shortly after release and I saw heavy discounts on the day of the earnings call too. It does seem a little strange if there are wait times.
Did they break the Mac numbers down (if only into desktop/laptop)?
Sorry. You are wrong.
This was the biggest revenue quarter for Mac of ALL TIME.
Now go get your cheap POS China phone and go troll somewhere else.
Mac sales on the typically HIGHER END @ 5.4 million units.
Take note, folks.
Yes, though I do wish Apple would shit or get off the pot with the Mac Pro. Just stop making the product if it's too difficult to manufacturer or isn't worth the resources.
l wish that they would just commit to some regularity in their product releases so that you know when an update would be coming. Each Year: iPhone, iPadPro, MacBook. Once Every two years: iPadAir#, iPhone SE, Apple TV, Apple Watch, MacBook Pro, iMac, MacPro. New SIRI speaker HUB once a year for first two years then every two years.
Comments
So for all you know, anything up to forty-nine per cent went to existing Mac users.
But if Apple increased sales then whichever way you look at it, it demonstrates that they know their target market better than you do, possibly because you're not in it.
No no one in their right mind is going to take your opinion over Horace Dediu.
That said, App Store revenue doesn't make up most of the Services revenue that Apple reports. It does, however, make up a large portion of it. They didn't state explicitly what their App Store revenue was, but from other things Mr. Cook said (and things we already now about how Services revenue is reported) we can reasonably conclude that it was likely in the $2 billion - $3 billion range.
Mr. Maestri did indicate that the App Store was driving significant growth in Services revenue, App Store revenue was up 43% YoY on a 13 weeks versus 13 weeks basis.
But there's a lot of speculation about why iPad sales are down YoY. I just recently updated my wife's iPad 2 to a iPad Pro, and I still use the original iPad mini. I'm pretty much an outlier on this, but Gruber's take on this at DaringFireball seems correct - the iPad simply doesn't need replacing as often. And really, neither does iPhone, but people are sort of...used to...making that update on their device they use every moment of the day. Not sure what this might mean to AppleWatch. iPhone 7 is the first launch day iPhone I bought. I like it. But it is unlikely I'll buy the next one, as I tend to skip a few cycles.
Macs are a completely different beast. The Mac Pro is the go-to device for many professionals, but is the current one good enough for them? Maybe. But making one that is upgradeable seems to limit the number of units you can sell in the future, and maybe that isn't as important as satisfying customers that use them. Again, I can't speak from experience, as I use a late 2009 27" iMac as a desktop, and I'm completely fine with it (upgrading the HD this weekend!) But I don't use my mac for professional video, music, image, photographic professional creation. I simply don't need a new mac....but I think many pros do.
I'll bet this is one of the strategies Apple really struggles with. Could they update the Mac Pro every year? Sure. What would that do to the bottom line? Murky.
Difficult to gauge but I'd say that there was potential to dramatically increase sales over what they actually managed.
Oh wait. Can we stop with 14 weeks vs 13 weeks BS? Up is up, down is down (according to media, stock analysts, shareholder, pundits, haters, etc.) - stop making excuses. No one gave a damn (with their constant Apple is Doom theory) when Apple missed their numbers from 14w to 13w, why now it's important to point out that Apple increase sales is due to 14w.
"but...but...but..."
I literally had an android troll tell me:
"but this is boring news!!
Asymco
Stratechery
Above Avalon
If you want proper analysis on Apple numbers, then those sites are where you go. It's no accident that these sites charge for their best stuff; decent analysis takes time and thinking to put together.
Android fans – nuff said.
Ex-Apple fans who move to Android but keep coming back because they lack the confidence to stick with their decision without trying to convince others they were right.
Current Apple fans who need Apple to fail so they will turn back the clock and start making machines for a shrinking (and dying, let's face it) group of customers.
Here's next year's meme for you:
"Yeah, Apple's sales went through the roof again, but if you take away all the sales they made in India…"
Seriously, people here are going to post that nonsense. They did it a few years back:
"Yeah, but if you take China out of the equation, then their sales weren't that great."
"Might"?
You're working too hard to find something that will prove that Apple was wrong in it's design decisions with the Mac.
But without any figures, you’re kinda just guessing, and so am I.
But for the sake of argument, let's assume that what you hope to be true is true: all the new Macs went to new customers. This would reinforce your hope that Apple's old customers have abandoned the Mac because it doesn't have ports or whatever, and of course, ignoring the other popular meme of the day that this is just pent up demand from the existing user base.
But the problem is that mac sales increased, both numbers and revenue.
If you are correct then it just proves what I've been saying for weeks; Apple is simply shifting its focus to a new, younger, more flexible market that will give them more benefits in the long term. From their point of view, there is no point in servicing a shrinking user base. Their sales went up; that's the result, and even if Apple didn't see that coming (which I very much doubt given the pricing on the new models) then any sensible company would see that there is more potential in attracting new users than sticking with the older ones who are more focussed on holding the platform back than seeing it move forward.
Yet another bogus argument.
Who in their right mind would look at Amazon's figures and then say:
"Well, they've done well, I guess; but if you take off all the stuff they sell but don't actually make themselves…"
Because by your weird logic, Amazon actually makes very little because most of the stuff they sell is actually made by other companies.
I think we're now scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for bad news here.
Also, I do not need to 'reinforce my hope' that Apple's customers have 'abandoned' the platform. That hope simply doesn't exist. I never said anyone abandoned anything.
In fact, I was probably the very first person to say that the only real way to have anything tangible was to wait for the Q1 results. I also clearly stated on numerous occasions that if they sold boatloads of the new MBPs then they wouldn't change track on design. That doesn't change my opinion though. It hasn't changed at all. If anything, I've seen more than enough examples of hardware tests failing and Apple replacing the entire machine with no attempt to repair it. My best wishes to any poor soul who needs repair out of warranty. It's not a position I want to be in for the asking price.
Users are users and the more the better IMO. However, your 'young and flexible' should have included 'fickle'.
'Might'? Yes of course. Guessing? That's all we or Apple can do but I'd say the idea of lost sales is not far off. Exactly why? Difficult call. You have me, who simply cannot afford a new MBP. I also refuse to buy because I detest the compromises that are bundled with it.
AFAIK Apple didn't mention how many new MBPs they sold. Am I correct on that (I haven't had time to listen to the call)? All I know is that supposedly the majority of Mac sales went to first time Mac buyers. Could that be a first for the company.
'Abandoning the platform'? Well, that didn't come from me but it certainly is a possibility. I have one foot out already. It wouldn't be crazy to think that others are in the same position. More logical would be to speculate that an enormous amount of Mac users simply skipped upgrading in the quarter. The possible reasons are varied but quite plausible:
Design decisions
Price
Repairability/upgradability
Nothing new (save for MBPs)
Currency fluctuations
Various of the above could have come into play (I'm absolutely certain that sales in the UK were affected by currency adjustments). Does that mean they are thinking about abandoning the platform? I'd say we have to wait for truly new iMacs before reaching that point or if the new MBPs get price cuts.
"Their sales went up; that's the result, and even if Apple didn't see that coming (which I very much doubt given the pricing on the new models)"
Are you saying that sales are up due to the new MBP in terms of unit sales?
For me it would be nice to know so I can plan for the future. If they sold in huge numbers there would be no point holding back any potential purchase. Another of my doubts was that they were heavily discounted shortly after release and I saw heavy discounts on the day of the earnings call too. It does seem a little strange if there are wait times.
Did they break the Mac numbers down (if only into desktop/laptop)?
There was a particular context to the post I made. Another poster - rogifan_new pointed out that growing Services revenue didn't necessarily refute the complaint that they and others have had about Apple not doing services well because those complaints weren't about most of the stuff that was counted in that Services revenue - their complaints or criticisms weren't about apps from the Apps Store or content from the iTunes Store or perhaps even the payment service that Apple offers to third-party service providers. The criticisms being referred to (not by me, but by others), it seems, were more about services that Apple provides itself. Sog35 responded with, among other things, information about paid subscriptions. I agreed that the paid subscriptions number was impressive but provided clarification in case some didn't know what that number actually referred to. In the context of that particular conversation that was a relevant clarification. If someone else's point is to distinguish between services that Apple actually provides itself (e.g. Apple Music or iCloud) and services which Apple just handles payments for or content and apps which are sold through Apple, then the distinction between those different kinds of services is certainly relevant. That was the point, it was based entirely on the point that rogifan_new was trying to make. And it didn't, btw, suggest that I agreed with rogifan_new's point. Regardless of whether I do, whether that paid subscription number represents (at all, mostly, or not at all) what they were referring to - what they were specifically trying to distinguish - matters to their point.
I think Apple's paid subscriptions business is great - whether it's about services they provide themselves or those which they handle billing for. I've seen the value for Apple in that kind of offering - that it was a big part of the value of the Apple ecosystem and building install base - for years. No one - not myself, anyway - is trying to diminish the importance of that aspect of what Apple does. You're reading something into my comments that just isn't there.
Mispost.
Once Every two years: iPadAir#, iPhone SE, Apple TV, Apple Watch, MacBook Pro, iMac, MacPro. New SIRI speaker HUB once a year for first two years then every two years.