You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Either that, or they decide that thetrade-offsarenot(yet)worththebenefitanddon’timplementit. (Whatever combination of factors that may be - space constraints, volume constraints in manufacturing - no other model approaches the volumes of a single iPhone line, which allows Tim Cook to negotiate prices no other manufacturer can, but also limits technology to that which can be supplied at volume -, cost, still having lots of room for improvement remaining in dual-camera tech, or just biding time until a completely different technology they’re working on is ready for the market...we don’t know.)
Remember how they simply abandoned research into Touch ID under the display, because it didn’t offer enough of an advantage over Face ID? They probably could have worked it out, but hadn’t no interest in doing so. In the meantime, others have implemented it — but primarily because they don’t have access to the technology needed *at volume* for Face ID-equivalent functionality.
Contrast with Huawei telling us explicitly that the technology they demonstrated is cost-prohibitive.
Oh, btw: the first true dual-camera phones came out in 2015. Apple didn’t follow suit until late 2016.
Which just happens to be exactly what I indicated.
The resulting price would have been too high for them - at that time.
There were a bunch of other options in there besides cost. It comes down to, I suppose: — not being able to figure it out vs. — not bothering to figure it out vs. — having figured it out and not doing it anyway vs. — having figured it out and just waiting until the time is right (the market is ready, the cost is right, capacity is there).
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
Also, because they very likely can’t get it to work as well as they claim. It won’t be the first time that companies make claims they can’t pull off, and it won’t be the last.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in facttmay said:
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
Warren Buffett owns something on the order of 5% of Apple, from my reading anyway, and he votes with his wallet. He doesn't see, nor do most investors, a downside of a mature iPhone market that still ships something on the order of 150 million flagships a year, plus 65 million other iPhones, at an ASP roughly 3X the nearest competition, from a iPhone user base numbering on the order of 750 million.
In only a single metric, quarterly unit sales, has Huawei even exceeded Apple's sales, and on a yearly basis, there's a good chance that Huawei won't do that in 2019 either, simply because they have stiff competition from BKK, Xiaomi, and Samsung in the Android OS market, and because there is a likely that Apple with see a growth spurt in sales this year; a super cycle you would call it. I would note that the smartphone market, worldwide, is seeing long term stagnation. Huawei's run for the goal seems a desperate grab for the few remaining growth opportunities, but it is taking share mostly from Samsung, who will certainly fight back.
Your "feature enhanced" Huawei phones are wonderful, from your perspective, but as I stated before, they don't compete directly with Apple's ecosystem which is broad and vertical, and those same features are diffused rapidly throughout the competition. If anything, I could point out that most of those features are "halo" for only a short time and while they drive the Huawei brand, they aren't really driving the kind of flagship sales that Apple has every, single, year. and more to the point, aren't going to be able continue the pace of a features only race.
Your arguments will continue to fail simply because you have attempted to simply the competition to devices and features and unit sales, discounting all of the other reasons that buyers purchase a particular model and brand.
Bums on seats. You estimate the user base at 750 million. With that base Apple has the services revenues it has. If it really wants to pump that side of the business up - within the ecosystem - it will need to shift units to unique users.
Meanwhile, it seems the smartphone business in developing nations is picking up, taking Android share with it. You will counter that those areas aren't of interest to Apple and those users aren't ideal Services customers either, to which I will say you are mistaken on the first count as Apple has been virtually insistent in its attempts to squeeze the iPhone 6 into places like India.
'Bums on seats' or as the analyst I quoted to you recently said: "Apple needs volume" (that, in the context of services).
BTW, wasn't it Buffet that didn't even own a smartphone?
As for Huawei and competition. The more the better! The Honor Magic 2 probably wouldn't ship with the Kirin 980 if it weren't for competition. Think about it. Huawei's sub brand getting the latest SoC.
That puts it above the iPhone 8, X series SoC for a fraction of the price without taking into account everything that makes the Magic brand special in the first place.
Normally, the A12 phones would cost a penny or two (historically, Apple's latest SoCs have). I'm hoping (in line with rumours) the new lineup will include an 'affordable' model. If it does, thank Huawei for being at least part of the reason behind it. If it doesn't, I hope there is something compelling in the new lineup that justifies the price.
You keep attributing products that Apple enters into the market as responses to Huawei, but that's both simplistic and incorrect. You keep comparing device features, a limited set that favors your Huawei brand, I might add, and unit pricing without comparing the ecosystems.
Apple knows that some people wanted the iPhone X last year, but were put off by the prices. A de-featured model with an LCD rather than the more expensive, and frankly, still production limited OLED, lacking a dual rear camera, is the rumored response. There aren't any replacements for the SE price point, because they just aren't great sellers.
All of the new models will be getting the A12, and based on recent sales data, Apple expects over 70% of sales to be just those three new models.
215m units x 70 percent , is a conservative 150 million units with A12 processors for this next year, but FY Q1 is going to be a blowout quarter for Apple for that model lineup.
All flagships.
Lots of expectation that Apple will blow through $100B revenue this next quarter; but I'm expecting even more than that, as I have posted.
I'm not against "bums on seats", but I, and Apple, don't see a process requiring high acquisition costs to counter an effort by Huawei, Samsung, or any other Android OS OEM, as a winning strategy, even in emerging countries.
As for the Kirin 980, I'm not seeing enough of an overall performance gain over an Apple A11 to be much of a threat to iPhone 8/8 Plus sales, and the rumors around the A12 are both that the "GPU is a beast", and that it will easily stave off any challengers, including the Kirin 980, and Exynos, and Snapdragon, processors coming out early next year.
Such is the nature of "competition".
, that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in fact that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
So, it's okay if Huawei doesn't implement a feature because of cost, but you consider it a problem for Apple, likely not for cost reasons, in my opinion, but because there isn't enough production capacity to actually produce the components that would be required for 150 million devices.
I remember when the iPhone X was released and you spend considerable effort stating that Huawei had the same access to Face ID components because they used them in telecom, but in truth, they weren't the right components for Huawei's equivalent of Face ID. Hence nothing comparable in Huawei's product lineup to date, and pretty much nothing at all for the rest of the Android OS device makers. Not rumored to arrive at all until component prices drop. Going back to Apple's iPhone X release, those same shortages likely impacted the FY Q1 revenues for Apple, even though those revenues were a record at $88 Billion. Given that the only noted shortages this go round are the screens for the LCD model, delaying its release slightly, I'm expecting those blowout revenues to happen. Apple would obviously love to implement those same functionalities on the backside for AR, in which Apple is fully ahead of Android OS devices, if those components were available in volume today. They aren't. As for cameras, specifically the triple lens models, those models are selling in such small numbers for the few Android OS device makers that have them, that it is hardly imperiling Apple to skip that this year, and launch in 2019. I'm always shocked, shocked, I say, when I confront person's as yourself pushing the high end models as "halo" devices, but not actually purchasing them. It's called eating your own dog food. Apple doesn't seem to have that problem with the iPhone X; people seem to be voting with their wallets.
The problem is that Avon, and others would rather believe the hype, and regard minor features as more important that actual functionality and value.
im also a,aged at how he defends Chinese manufacturers who hac]ve R&D and manufacturing’s costs that are exactly the same as anyone else’s, yet charge hundreds less. There’s a reason for that, yet, he refuses, as do other supporters of cheaper devices, to understand why these companies can do that, and it’s not due to their expertise. It’s called dumping, and it’s something that allowed the Japanese to get their industry used around the world.
So, it's okay if Huawei doesn't implement a feature because of cost, but you consider it a problem for Apple, likely not for cost reasons, in my opinion, but because there isn't enough production capacity to actually produce the components that would be required for 150 million devices.
I remember when the iPhone X was released and you spend considerable effort stating that Huawei had the same access to Face ID components because they used them in telecom, but in truth, they weren't the right components for Huawei's equivalent of Face ID. Hence nothing comparable in Huawei's product lineup to date, and pretty much nothing at all for the rest of the Android OS device makers. Not rumored to arrive at all until component prices drop. Going back to Apple's iPhone X release, those same shortages likely impacted the FY Q1 revenues for Apple, even though those revenues were a record at $88 Billion. Given that the only noted shortages this go round are the screens for the LCD model, delaying its release slightly, I'm expecting those blowout revenues to happen. Apple would obviously love to implement those same functionalities on the backside for AR, in which Apple is fully ahead of Android OS devices, if those components were available in volume today. They aren't. As for cameras, specifically the triple lens models, those models are selling in such small numbers for the few Android OS device makers that have them, that it is hardly imperiling Apple to skip that this year, and launch in 2019. I'm always shocked, shocked, I say, when I confront person's as yourself pushing the high end models as "halo" devices, but not actually purchasing them. It's called eating your own dog food. Apple doesn't seem to have that problem with the iPhone X; people seem to be voting with their wallets.
My point last year was that Honor had their own system in the works. It was presented and demoed. It wasn't some copy of Apple's. From there it is anybody's guess as to when they will present it. We could only speculate. Honor then stated in January that it would simply cost too much for its handsets - at that time. Remember, their system (as detailed) had 10 times the accuracy of Apple's so cost was obviously a factor, we just didn't know how much until they actually stated it.
It turns out that Huawei was focussed on the triple camera and in hindsight was the better decision as the P20 Pro has taken all of the limelight since it was released.
Honor's decision to present and demo their technology was the right thing to do. They can now release it when they see fit and nobody can say they are copying Apple. In fact, I think Apple should copy the Honor use model. They have already implemented more facial feature detection in animojis.
3D depth sensing was never ever intended for 150 million devices at presentation. Not from Apple or Huawei. It was simply too expensive.
The component shortages you mention were due to unforeseen problems that caused a delay that wasn't very long at all. The problem with the delay was when it happened.
in fact, all the talk of component shortages and Android handsets being two years behind Apple were actually wrong.
Apple has a problem with iPhone X and every other model: flat sales.
Yes, people are voting with their wallets. My guess is that iPhone X has sold less in each subsequent quarter since release. Depending on your point of view, that could be an issue or not.
I believe, as explained many times, that flat sales are a problem. For major revenue growth we are now, in all liklihood, in a 'post iPhone' era. Hence the push into many other areas that go from the eternal AppleCare through to video content creation: Services.
Even with the current userbase, services will hit a wall. Apple needs volume in unit sales and its historical model wasn't cutting it. Hence the major (and applauded by me) changes last year. Three phones instead of two. Largest model spread ever. Attempting to enter developing markets etc.
There are still problems and unanswered questions but they will largely be addressed in a couple of weeks. We will know (officially at least) if three models is the new approach (rather than a one-off). We will know if a new phone will be a low cost/affordable variant or not. There might be something else. We are all guessing. A big problem is the annual refresh cycle. This has been highlighted by just about every new phone this year going almost full screen and Apple stuck with two flagship models looking decidedly dated and no options to remedy the situation in the short term. Apple is in a fast moving industry but moving like a sloth. The result is what I just explained. When Apple was ahead of the field, that worked ok. But not now. Apple is playing catch up, or do you think they are not lagging in major areas, like the ones I mentioned earlier?
I would like to see things change in two weeks but a lot of people seem convinced that things like the modem won't see any major improvements. Huawei is marketing the Kirin 980 as future proofed because of its Balong 5000 compatibilty. No doubt, next year (it's just around the corner), this will be a selling point as we head into 2020 and the 5G rollout. They have included and new version of the NPU and put TWO of them on the SoC. They have even included a massively fast homebrew wireless chip and rumours point to some serious battery tech upgrades. These are important areas. More performance probably won't mean much if other things don't change. After all, that's what happened last year and three quarters later, sales still look flat.
Just like with the camera, taking good photos won't set you apart. Too many phones do that. You need to do things your competitors can't do or do them MUCH better (or cheaper of course).
It's dificult to imagine an iPhone not getting a major camera upgrade but once its here, there will be nothing more til this time next year and we already know Huawei has four new flagships coming in the same period (and that's not including the Magic 2).
All that said, though, guidance for this quarter was very strong so I suppose something is in the pipe.
And before you ask, no I don't like the AI Cube, which wierdly, isn't a cube! LOL
From your continued ramblings, it's apparent that you haven't a clue about what's going on with Apple, or how Apple works, and you're scared silly that your team will never, ever win. That's why your here at AI, to prove that your team can win, will win.
I've given you information to educate you, over and over again, about how Apple works, and you continue to ignore it.
So three years of flat sales isn't an issue for you. That's fine.
Seeing your $1,000 bacon saver run out of steam in less than twelve months isn't an issue for you either. That's fine.
Being behind in key technological areas of the star product isn't an issue for you either. That's fine.
Not being able to fully push services due to an inability to increase unit sales isn't an issue because there is a 750 million user base (even though there are not 750 million unique users to target from a services perspective). That's fine.
That's fine for you but it is not fine for Apple.
Their moves clearly show this. They are trying to change things and they made major changes last year. Why change things if they are working?
I don't have a 'team'. I don't need anyone to 'win'. I am a consumer. If there is a team at all it is the consumer and no one has to win either. Both should benefit, but history shows that only usually happens when there is competition.
Right now, and for quite a while now, Apple's strongest competitor is Huawei. Yes, it is also Samsung's biggest competitor too but, as things stand today at least, Huawei is ahead of both of them in the handset business. Both have been playing catch up. You are shielded from Huawei because they are invisible in the US due to political reasons. You can't visit a store and actually handle a Huawei phone easily. It's hard for you to envisage how they could be a commercial threat but they are. The rest of the world is a huge place. You will run into a lot of Huawei phones when you leave the US.
We will see if the new lineup injects something to change that situation in two weeks, but at a minimum, the four areas I mentioned need to see improvements.
The smartphone industry, worldwide, has seen dropping sales the last two years, so flat sales is a victory.
you, and many others, unfortunately, fail to understand what happened with Apple salesseveral years ago when the 6/6+ came out. That year, sales leaped by an astounding 49%. Where do you think much of that came from? In addition to those coming from Android in larger numbers than usual, people who were going to upgrade the next year, and even the year after, upgraded then instead. Anyone who expected bigger sales the next year simply didn’t understand that dynamic. The year after saw better sales than the year after, and this year, sales are better still. But Apple is still seeing the hangover from that year.
i ignite these who are making predictions, and evaluate the past, because most of them are, quite frankly, idiots. And those who believe them are not far behind. Apple will have a pretty good year with these new phones, believe anything else, and you’re showing ignorance.
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Sure! So far, there’s no evidence that these systems are any better. That’s more hype. Can’t do two really good cameras, then put three lessor ones in. It’s amazing what some people will believe. When Samsung announced, this year, that they were going to have an aperture on a lens, I read a half dozen articles at how this would change everything with smartphone cameras. The phone comes out, and the cameras are tested, and what? The pictures are good, but no improvement with the aperture. Another phone came out a year or two ago with one B/W camera for resolution, and the other just for color indo. Well, that’s was going to be far better, all the fawning web sits stated, including a couple of the photo sites. What happened there? Surprisingly crappy pictures! There are other examples. Until a company can get something out the door, it’s vaporware. It’s why Apple doesn’t announce new features until they produce them.
another interesting this is that whenever there’s a rumor of Apple wanting to do something, other manufacturers jump on it quickly, hoping to get it out before Apple does, if possible. Adding another camera is fairly easy, so they can jump on it. So maybe Apple is working on this, on their own schedule, and will come out with it when they are ready, in such case, it will serve a purpose, and actually do something useful. Or, and this is just as likely, it’s just another rumor with no substance. I remember pretty well that Samsung, and others came out with 16NP cameras just a few years ago. Apple just came out with 12. Wow! 16MP will be so sharp! Except it was only under a few very well lit conditions, and only in the brighter portions of the image. Otherwise, the pictures were pretty bad. So what happened? While Apple was being tied to the rails for not having 16MP in their own camera, the others, very quietly, without the hype they used when going to 16MP, went back to 12MP.
so stop being so gullible and believing everything that these companies claim, just because, for whatever reason, you want to see Apple bashed.
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Either that, or they decide that thetrade-offsarenot(yet)worththebenefitanddon’timplementit. (Whatever combination of factors that may be - space constraints, volume constraints in manufacturing - no other model approaches the volumes of a single iPhone line, which allows Tim Cook to negotiate prices no other manufacturer can, but also limits technology to that which can be supplied at volume -, cost, still having lots of room for improvement remaining in dual-camera tech, or just biding time until a completely different technology they’re working on is ready for the market...we don’t know.)
Remember how they simply abandoned research into Touch ID under the display, because it didn’t offer enough of an advantage over Face ID? They probably could have worked it out, but hadn’t no interest in doing so. In the meantime, others have implemented it — but primarily because they don’t have access to the technology needed *at volume* for Face ID-equivalent functionality.
Contrast with Huawei telling us explicitly that the technology they demonstrated is cost-prohibitive.
Oh, btw: the first true dual-camera phones came out in 2015. Apple didn’t follow suit until late 2016.
Which just happens to be exactly what I indicated.
The resulting price would have been too high for them - at that time.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in facttmay said:
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
Warren Buffett owns something on the order of 5% of Apple, from my reading anyway, and he votes with his wallet. He doesn't see, nor do most investors, a downside of a mature iPhone market that still ships something on the order of 150 million flagships a year, plus 65 million other iPhones, at an ASP roughly 3X the nearest competition, from a iPhone user base numbering on the order of 750 million.
In only a single metric, quarterly unit sales, has Huawei even exceeded Apple's sales, and on a yearly basis, there's a good chance that Huawei won't do that in 2019 either, simply because they have stiff competition from BKK, Xiaomi, and Samsung in the Android OS market, and because there is a likely that Apple with see a growth spurt in sales this year; a super cycle you would call it. I would note that the smartphone market, worldwide, is seeing long term stagnation. Huawei's run for the goal seems a desperate grab for the few remaining growth opportunities, but it is taking share mostly from Samsung, who will certainly fight back.
Your "feature enhanced" Huawei phones are wonderful, from your perspective, but as I stated before, they don't compete directly with Apple's ecosystem which is broad and vertical, and those same features are diffused rapidly throughout the competition. If anything, I could point out that most of those features are "halo" for only a short time and while they drive the Huawei brand, they aren't really driving the kind of flagship sales that Apple has every, single, year. and more to the point, aren't going to be able continue the pace of a features only race.
Your arguments will continue to fail simply because you have attempted to simply the competition to devices and features and unit sales, discounting all of the other reasons that buyers purchase a particular model and brand.
Bums on seats. You estimate the user base at 750 million. With that base Apple has the services revenues it has. If it really wants to pump that side of the business up - within the ecosystem - it will need to shift units to unique users.
Meanwhile, it seems the smartphone business in developing nations is picking up, taking Android share with it. You will counter that those areas aren't of interest to Apple and those users aren't ideal Services customers either, to which I will say you are mistaken on the first count as Apple has been virtually insistent in its attempts to squeeze the iPhone 6 into places like India.
'Bums on seats' or as the analyst I quoted to you recently said: "Apple needs volume" (that, in the context of services).
BTW, wasn't it Buffet that didn't even own a smartphone?
As for Huawei and competition. The more the better! The Honor Magic 2 probably wouldn't ship with the Kirin 980 if it weren't for competition. Think about it. Huawei's sub brand getting the latest SoC.
That puts it above the iPhone 8, X series SoC for a fraction of the price without taking into account everything that makes the Magic brand special in the first place.
Normally, the A12 phones would cost a penny or two (historically, Apple's latest SoCs have). I'm hoping (in line with rumours) the new lineup will include an 'affordable' model. If it does, thank Huawei for being at least part of the reason behind it. If it doesn't, I hope there is something compelling in the new lineup that justifies the price.
You keep attributing products that Apple enters into the market as responses to Huawei, but that's both simplistic and incorrect. You keep comparing device features, a limited set that favors your Huawei brand, I might add, and unit pricing without comparing the ecosystems.
Apple knows that some people wanted the iPhone X last year, but were put off by the prices. A de-featured model with an LCD rather than the more expensive, and frankly, still production limited OLED, lacking a dual rear camera, is the rumored response. There aren't any replacements for the SE price point, because they just aren't great sellers.
All of the new models will be getting the A12, and based on recent sales data, Apple expects over 70% of sales to be just those three new models.
215m units x 70 percent , is a conservative 150 million units with A12 processors for this next year, but FY Q1 is going to be a blowout quarter for Apple for that model lineup.
All flagships.
Lots of expectation that Apple will blow through $100B revenue this next quarter; but I'm expecting even more than that, as I have posted.
I'm not against "bums on seats", but I, and Apple, don't see a process requiring high acquisition costs to counter an effort by Huawei, Samsung, or any other Android OS OEM, as a winning strategy, even in emerging countries.
As for the Kirin 980, I'm not seeing enough of an overall performance gain over an Apple A11 to be much of a threat to iPhone 8/8 Plus sales, and the rumors around the A12 are both that the "GPU is a beast", and that it will easily stave off any challengers, including the Kirin 980, and Exynos, and Snapdragon, processors coming out early next year.
Such is the nature of "competition".
, that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in fact that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
So, it's okay if Huawei doesn't implement a feature because of cost, but you consider it a problem for Apple, likely not for cost reasons, in my opinion, but because there isn't enough production capacity to actually produce the components that would be required for 150 million devices.
I remember when the iPhone X was released and you spend considerable effort stating that Huawei had the same access to Face ID components because they used them in telecom, but in truth, they weren't the right components for Huawei's equivalent of Face ID. Hence nothing comparable in Huawei's product lineup to date, and pretty much nothing at all for the rest of the Android OS device makers. Not rumored to arrive at all until component prices drop. Going back to Apple's iPhone X release, those same shortages likely impacted the FY Q1 revenues for Apple, even though those revenues were a record at $88 Billion. Given that the only noted shortages this go round are the screens for the LCD model, delaying its release slightly, I'm expecting those blowout revenues to happen. Apple would obviously love to implement those same functionalities on the backside for AR, in which Apple is fully ahead of Android OS devices, if those components were available in volume today. They aren't. As for cameras, specifically the triple lens models, those models are selling in such small numbers for the few Android OS device makers that have them, that it is hardly imperiling Apple to skip that this year, and launch in 2019. I'm always shocked, shocked, I say, when I confront person's as yourself pushing the high end models as "halo" devices, but not actually purchasing them. It's called eating your own dog food. Apple doesn't seem to have that problem with the iPhone X; people seem to be voting with their wallets.
The problem is that Avon, and others would rather believe the hype, and regard minor features as more important that actual functionality and value.
im also a,aged at how he defends Chinese manufacturers who hac]ve R&D and manufacturing’s costs that are exactly the same as anyone else’s, yet charge hundreds less. There’s a reason for that, yet, he refuses, as do other supporters of cheaper devices, to understand why these companies can do that, and it’s not due to their expertise. It’s called dumping, and it’s something that allowed the Japanese to get their industry used around the world.
It's not often that companies find stability, and high value, in a mature market. Apple appears to have done that, and I would certainly put that down to their history of innovation, brand, and especially, ecosystem.
Avon's error is how Android OS devices compete with Apple, not just with the iPhone. It isn't much, and is almost certainly due to price, and that nebulous "open", more so that the bragging rights of a few "halo" features of limited real world utility.
I'm more than happy to watch Huawei sell (dump) product into an Android OS marketplace that has little growth other than a few emerging markets. It's a zero sum game with high acquisition costs and low brand loyalty. Aspiration users, will still trend towards Apple; if not today, then tomorrow or the next year.
5G is certainly another technology that is overhyped in the device market, today anyway. Model's hyping it as "future proofing" are really going to best serve the narrow group of people that are willing to put up with the lengthy implementation problems. That isn't the general public.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in facttmay said:
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
Warren Buffett owns something on the order of 5% of Apple, from my reading anyway, and he votes with his wallet. He doesn't see, nor do most investors, a downside of a mature iPhone market that still ships something on the order of 150 million flagships a year, plus 65 million other iPhones, at an ASP roughly 3X the nearest competition, from a iPhone user base numbering on the order of 750 million.
In only a single metric, quarterly unit sales, has Huawei even exceeded Apple's sales, and on a yearly basis, there's a good chance that Huawei won't do that in 2019 either, simply because they have stiff competition from BKK, Xiaomi, and Samsung in the Android OS market, and because there is a likely that Apple with see a growth spurt in sales this year; a super cycle you would call it. I would note that the smartphone market, worldwide, is seeing long term stagnation. Huawei's run for the goal seems a desperate grab for the few remaining growth opportunities, but it is taking share mostly from Samsung, who will certainly fight back.
Your "feature enhanced" Huawei phones are wonderful, from your perspective, but as I stated before, they don't compete directly with Apple's ecosystem which is broad and vertical, and those same features are diffused rapidly throughout the competition. If anything, I could point out that most of those features are "halo" for only a short time and while they drive the Huawei brand, they aren't really driving the kind of flagship sales that Apple has every, single, year. and more to the point, aren't going to be able continue the pace of a features only race.
Your arguments will continue to fail simply because you have attempted to simply the competition to devices and features and unit sales, discounting all of the other reasons that buyers purchase a particular model and brand.
Bums on seats. You estimate the user base at 750 million. With that base Apple has the services revenues it has. If it really wants to pump that side of the business up - within the ecosystem - it will need to shift units to unique users.
Meanwhile, it seems the smartphone business in developing nations is picking up, taking Android share with it. You will counter that those areas aren't of interest to Apple and those users aren't ideal Services customers either, to which I will say you are mistaken on the first count as Apple has been virtually insistent in its attempts to squeeze the iPhone 6 into places like India.
'Bums on seats' or as the analyst I quoted to you recently said: "Apple needs volume" (that, in the context of services).
BTW, wasn't it Buffet that didn't even own a smartphone?
As for Huawei and competition. The more the better! The Honor Magic 2 probably wouldn't ship with the Kirin 980 if it weren't for competition. Think about it. Huawei's sub brand getting the latest SoC.
That puts it above the iPhone 8, X series SoC for a fraction of the price without taking into account everything that makes the Magic brand special in the first place.
Normally, the A12 phones would cost a penny or two (historically, Apple's latest SoCs have). I'm hoping (in line with rumours) the new lineup will include an 'affordable' model. If it does, thank Huawei for being at least part of the reason behind it. If it doesn't, I hope there is something compelling in the new lineup that justifies the price.
You keep attributing products that Apple enters into the market as responses to Huawei, but that's both simplistic and incorrect. You keep comparing device features, a limited set that favors your Huawei brand, I might add, and unit pricing without comparing the ecosystems.
Apple knows that some people wanted the iPhone X last year, but were put off by the prices. A de-featured model with an LCD rather than the more expensive, and frankly, still production limited OLED, lacking a dual rear camera, is the rumored response. There aren't any replacements for the SE price point, because they just aren't great sellers.
All of the new models will be getting the A12, and based on recent sales data, Apple expects over 70% of sales to be just those three new models.
215m units x 70 percent , is a conservative 150 million units with A12 processors for this next year, but FY Q1 is going to be a blowout quarter for Apple for that model lineup.
All flagships.
Lots of expectation that Apple will blow through $100B revenue this next quarter; but I'm expecting even more than that, as I have posted.
I'm not against "bums on seats", but I, and Apple, don't see a process requiring high acquisition costs to counter an effort by Huawei, Samsung, or any other Android OS OEM, as a winning strategy, even in emerging countries.
As for the Kirin 980, I'm not seeing enough of an overall performance gain over an Apple A11 to be much of a threat to iPhone 8/8 Plus sales, and the rumors around the A12 are both that the "GPU is a beast", and that it will easily stave off any challengers, including the Kirin 980, and Exynos, and Snapdragon, processors coming out early next year.
Such is the nature of "competition".
, that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in fact that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
So, it's okay if Huawei doesn't implement a feature because of cost, but you consider it a problem for Apple, likely not for cost reasons, in my opinion, but because there isn't enough production capacity to actually produce the components that would be required for 150 million devices.
I remember when the iPhone X was released and you spend considerable effort stating that Huawei had the same access to Face ID components because they used them in telecom, but in truth, they weren't the right components for Huawei's equivalent of Face ID. Hence nothing comparable in Huawei's product lineup to date, and pretty much nothing at all for the rest of the Android OS device makers. Not rumored to arrive at all until component prices drop. Going back to Apple's iPhone X release, those same shortages likely impacted the FY Q1 revenues for Apple, even though those revenues were a record at $88 Billion. Given that the only noted shortages this go round are the screens for the LCD model, delaying its release slightly, I'm expecting those blowout revenues to happen. Apple would obviously love to implement those same functionalities on the backside for AR, in which Apple is fully ahead of Android OS devices, if those components were available in volume today. They aren't. As for cameras, specifically the triple lens models, those models are selling in such small numbers for the few Android OS device makers that have them, that it is hardly imperiling Apple to skip that this year, and launch in 2019. I'm always shocked, shocked, I say, when I confront person's as yourself pushing the high end models as "halo" devices, but not actually purchasing them. It's called eating your own dog food. Apple doesn't seem to have that problem with the iPhone X; people seem to be voting with their wallets.
The problem is that Avon, and others would rather believe the hype, and regard minor features as more important that actual functionality and value.
im also a,aged at how he defends Chinese manufacturers who hac]ve R&D and manufacturing’s costs that are exactly the same as anyone else’s, yet charge hundreds less. There’s a reason for that, yet, he refuses, as do other supporters of cheaper devices, to understand why these companies can do that, and it’s not due to their expertise. It’s called dumping, and it’s something that allowed the Japanese to get their industry used around the world.
How is Huawei dumping when it has increased handset prices in recent years and moved into higher and higher premium bands?
There R&D costs are not the same as everyone else's. They are historically higher.
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Either that, or they decide that thetrade-offsarenot(yet)worththebenefitanddon’timplementit. (Whatever combination of factors that may be - space constraints, volume constraints in manufacturing - no other model approaches the volumes of a single iPhone line, which allows Tim Cook to negotiate prices no other manufacturer can, but also limits technology to that which can be supplied at volume -, cost, still having lots of room for improvement remaining in dual-camera tech, or just biding time until a completely different technology they’re working on is ready for the market...we don’t know.)
Remember how they simply abandoned research into Touch ID under the display, because it didn’t offer enough of an advantage over Face ID? They probably could have worked it out, but hadn’t no interest in doing so. In the meantime, others have implemented it — but primarily because they don’t have access to the technology needed *at volume* for Face ID-equivalent functionality.
Contrast with Huawei telling us explicitly that the technology they demonstrated is cost-prohibitive.
Oh, btw: the first true dual-camera phones came out in 2015. Apple didn’t follow suit until late 2016.
Which just happens to be exactly what I indicated.
The resulting price would have been too high for them - at that time.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in facttmay said:
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
Warren Buffett owns something on the order of 5% of Apple, from my reading anyway, and he votes with his wallet. He doesn't see, nor do most investors, a downside of a mature iPhone market that still ships something on the order of 150 million flagships a year, plus 65 million other iPhones, at an ASP roughly 3X the nearest competition, from a iPhone user base numbering on the order of 750 million.
In only a single metric, quarterly unit sales, has Huawei even exceeded Apple's sales, and on a yearly basis, there's a good chance that Huawei won't do that in 2019 either, simply because they have stiff competition from BKK, Xiaomi, and Samsung in the Android OS market, and because there is a likely that Apple with see a growth spurt in sales this year; a super cycle you would call it. I would note that the smartphone market, worldwide, is seeing long term stagnation. Huawei's run for the goal seems a desperate grab for the few remaining growth opportunities, but it is taking share mostly from Samsung, who will certainly fight back.
Your "feature enhanced" Huawei phones are wonderful, from your perspective, but as I stated before, they don't compete directly with Apple's ecosystem which is broad and vertical, and those same features are diffused rapidly throughout the competition. If anything, I could point out that most of those features are "halo" for only a short time and while they drive the Huawei brand, they aren't really driving the kind of flagship sales that Apple has every, single, year. and more to the point, aren't going to be able continue the pace of a features only race.
Your arguments will continue to fail simply because you have attempted to simply the competition to devices and features and unit sales, discounting all of the other reasons that buyers purchase a particular model and brand.
Bums on seats. You estimate the user base at 750 million. With that base Apple has the services revenues it has. If it really wants to pump that side of the business up - within the ecosystem - it will need to shift units to unique users.
Meanwhile, it seems the smartphone business in developing nations is picking up, taking Android share with it. You will counter that those areas aren't of interest to Apple and those users aren't ideal Services customers either, to which I will say you are mistaken on the first count as Apple has been virtually insistent in its attempts to squeeze the iPhone 6 into places like India.
'Bums on seats' or as the analyst I quoted to you recently said: "Apple needs volume" (that, in the context of services).
BTW, wasn't it Buffet that didn't even own a smartphone?
As for Huawei and competition. The more the better! The Honor Magic 2 probably wouldn't ship with the Kirin 980 if it weren't for competition. Think about it. Huawei's sub brand getting the latest SoC.
That puts it above the iPhone 8, X series SoC for a fraction of the price without taking into account everything that makes the Magic brand special in the first place.
Normally, the A12 phones would cost a penny or two (historically, Apple's latest SoCs have). I'm hoping (in line with rumours) the new lineup will include an 'affordable' model. If it does, thank Huawei for being at least part of the reason behind it. If it doesn't, I hope there is something compelling in the new lineup that justifies the price.
You keep attributing products that Apple enters into the market as responses to Huawei, but that's both simplistic and incorrect. You keep comparing device features, a limited set that favors your Huawei brand, I might add, and unit pricing without comparing the ecosystems.
Apple knows that some people wanted the iPhone X last year, but were put off by the prices. A de-featured model with an LCD rather than the more expensive, and frankly, still production limited OLED, lacking a dual rear camera, is the rumored response. There aren't any replacements for the SE price point, because they just aren't great sellers.
All of the new models will be getting the A12, and based on recent sales data, Apple expects over 70% of sales to be just those three new models.
215m units x 70 percent , is a conservative 150 million units with A12 processors for this next year, but FY Q1 is going to be a blowout quarter for Apple for that model lineup.
All flagships.
Lots of expectation that Apple will blow through $100B revenue this next quarter; but I'm expecting even more than that, as I have posted.
I'm not against "bums on seats", but I, and Apple, don't see a process requiring high acquisition costs to counter an effort by Huawei, Samsung, or any other Android OS OEM, as a winning strategy, even in emerging countries.
As for the Kirin 980, I'm not seeing enough of an overall performance gain over an Apple A11 to be much of a threat to iPhone 8/8 Plus sales, and the rumors around the A12 are both that the "GPU is a beast", and that it will easily stave off any challengers, including the Kirin 980, and Exynos, and Snapdragon, processors coming out early next year.
Such is the nature of "competition".
, that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in fact that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
So, it's okay if Huawei doesn't implement a feature because of cost, but you consider it a problem for Apple, likely not for cost reasons, in my opinion, but because there isn't enough production capacity to actually produce the components that would be required for 150 million devices.
I remember when the iPhone X was released and you spend considerable effort stating that Huawei had the same access to Face ID components because they used them in telecom, but in truth, they weren't the right components for Huawei's equivalent of Face ID. Hence nothing comparable in Huawei's product lineup to date, and pretty much nothing at all for the rest of the Android OS device makers. Not rumored to arrive at all until component prices drop. Going back to Apple's iPhone X release, those same shortages likely impacted the FY Q1 revenues for Apple, even though those revenues were a record at $88 Billion. Given that the only noted shortages this go round are the screens for the LCD model, delaying its release slightly, I'm expecting those blowout revenues to happen. Apple would obviously love to implement those same functionalities on the backside for AR, in which Apple is fully ahead of Android OS devices, if those components were available in volume today. They aren't. As for cameras, specifically the triple lens models, those models are selling in such small numbers for the few Android OS device makers that have them, that it is hardly imperiling Apple to skip that this year, and launch in 2019. I'm always shocked, shocked, I say, when I confront person's as yourself pushing the high end models as "halo" devices, but not actually purchasing them. It's called eating your own dog food. Apple doesn't seem to have that problem with the iPhone X; people seem to be voting with their wallets.
The problem is that Avon, and others would rather believe the hype, and regard minor features as more important that actual functionality and value.
im also a,aged at how he defends Chinese manufacturers who hac]ve R&D and manufacturing’s costs that are exactly the same as anyone else’s, yet charge hundreds less. There’s a reason for that, yet, he refuses, as do other supporters of cheaper devices, to understand why these companies can do that, and it’s not due to their expertise. It’s called dumping, and it’s something that allowed the Japanese to get their industry used around the world.
How is Huawei dumping when it has increased handset prices in recent years and moved into higher and higher premium bands?
There R&D costs are not the same as everyone else's. They are historically higher.
You provided me a link back in the spring, which stated the Huawei's European sales had increased 38%, but their revenues had only increased 1.7%.
Please explain how that happens if Huawei is selling more expensive products.
"Canalys also indicated that Huawei's primary shipments in the quarter are cheaper handsets due to a delay of its expensive flagship P20 phones. Although Huawei's shipments expanded nearly 40 percent in the quarter, it only managed to boost its shipment value by 1.7 percent over the previous year. Conversely, the high price of the Galaxy S9, as well as its earlier launch in the calendar year than the Galaxy S8, helped Samsung boost its shipment value by over 20 percent, according to the research agency."
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market? " O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
Also, because they very likely can’t get it to work as well as they claim. It won’t be the first time that companies make claims they can’t pull off, and it won’t be the last.
Very likely?
A few weeks after Apple released FaceID they revealed their own take and gave a lot of details. An engineer from Honor even demoed a 3D face scan in real time while casually walking around a show floor. All prototype stuff and pretty ugly hardware but totally normal becsuse they obviously weren't going to release it on an unreleased phone.
What makes things 'very likely'?
We know 3D depth sensing is expensive. We know that cost is the reason they gave. Shouldn't we give them the benefit of the doubt at least?
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Either that, or they decide that thetrade-offsarenot(yet)worththebenefitanddon’timplementit. (Whatever combination of factors that may be - space constraints, volume constraints in manufacturing - no other model approaches the volumes of a single iPhone line, which allows Tim Cook to negotiate prices no other manufacturer can, but also limits technology to that which can be supplied at volume -, cost, still having lots of room for improvement remaining in dual-camera tech, or just biding time until a completely different technology they’re working on is ready for the market...we don’t know.)
Remember how they simply abandoned research into Touch ID under the display, because it didn’t offer enough of an advantage over Face ID? They probably could have worked it out, but hadn’t no interest in doing so. In the meantime, others have implemented it — but primarily because they don’t have access to the technology needed *at volume* for Face ID-equivalent functionality.
Contrast with Huawei telling us explicitly that the technology they demonstrated is cost-prohibitive.
Oh, btw: the first true dual-camera phones came out in 2015. Apple didn’t follow suit until late 2016.
Which just happens to be exactly what I indicated.
The resulting price would have been too high for them - at that time.
Once Apple had a production source of Face ID components (they even gave one U.S. company $300 m to build factory), and had it incorporated into it's iPhones, at best, in-screen TouchID would have been less secure, and hence was deprecated.
I highly doubt that Apple will every revisit TouchID, of any kind, for any new iPhones, and it isn't because of incremental costs.
FaceID is superior for security, which makes me wonder why Huawei hasn't at least offered something at least equivalent to what Apple has provided. There's no innovation if you don't ship it to customers that are buying the very products that have it.
Huawei didn't do it because they couldn't source the components; either too costly/unavailable or both. Apple delivered, in volume, and I expect another 150 million iPhones with FaceID to be sold this year.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in facttmay said:
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
Warren Buffett owns something on the order of 5% of Apple, from my reading anyway, and he votes with his wallet. He doesn't see, nor do most investors, a downside of a mature iPhone market that still ships something on the order of 150 million flagships a year, plus 65 million other iPhones, at an ASP roughly 3X the nearest competition, from a iPhone user base numbering on the order of 750 million.
In only a single metric, quarterly unit sales, has Huawei even exceeded Apple's sales, and on a yearly basis, there's a good chance that Huawei won't do that in 2019 either, simply because they have stiff competition from BKK, Xiaomi, and Samsung in the Android OS market, and because there is a likely that Apple with see a growth spurt in sales this year; a super cycle you would call it. I would note that the smartphone market, worldwide, is seeing long term stagnation. Huawei's run for the goal seems a desperate grab for the few remaining growth opportunities, but it is taking share mostly from Samsung, who will certainly fight back.
Your "feature enhanced" Huawei phones are wonderful, from your perspective, but as I stated before, they don't compete directly with Apple's ecosystem which is broad and vertical, and those same features are diffused rapidly throughout the competition. If anything, I could point out that most of those features are "halo" for only a short time and while they drive the Huawei brand, they aren't really driving the kind of flagship sales that Apple has every, single, year. and more to the point, aren't going to be able continue the pace of a features only race.
Your arguments will continue to fail simply because you have attempted to simply the competition to devices and features and unit sales, discounting all of the other reasons that buyers purchase a particular model and brand.
Bums on seats. You estimate the user base at 750 million. With that base Apple has the services revenues it has. If it really wants to pump that side of the business up - within the ecosystem - it will need to shift units to unique users.
Meanwhile, it seems the smartphone business in developing nations is picking up, taking Android share with it. You will counter that those areas aren't of interest to Apple and those users aren't ideal Services customers either, to which I will say you are mistaken on the first count as Apple has been virtually insistent in its attempts to squeeze the iPhone 6 into places like India.
'Bums on seats' or as the analyst I quoted to you recently said: "Apple needs volume" (that, in the context of services).
BTW, wasn't it Buffet that didn't even own a smartphone?
As for Huawei and competition. The more the better! The Honor Magic 2 probably wouldn't ship with the Kirin 980 if it weren't for competition. Think about it. Huawei's sub brand getting the latest SoC.
That puts it above the iPhone 8, X series SoC for a fraction of the price without taking into account everything that makes the Magic brand special in the first place.
Normally, the A12 phones would cost a penny or two (historically, Apple's latest SoCs have). I'm hoping (in line with rumours) the new lineup will include an 'affordable' model. If it does, thank Huawei for being at least part of the reason behind it. If it doesn't, I hope there is something compelling in the new lineup that justifies the price.
You keep attributing products that Apple enters into the market as responses to Huawei, but that's both simplistic and incorrect. You keep comparing device features, a limited set that favors your Huawei brand, I might add, and unit pricing without comparing the ecosystems.
Apple knows that some people wanted the iPhone X last year, but were put off by the prices. A de-featured model with an LCD rather than the more expensive, and frankly, still production limited OLED, lacking a dual rear camera, is the rumored response. There aren't any replacements for the SE price point, because they just aren't great sellers.
All of the new models will be getting the A12, and based on recent sales data, Apple expects over 70% of sales to be just those three new models.
215m units x 70 percent , is a conservative 150 million units with A12 processors for this next year, but FY Q1 is going to be a blowout quarter for Apple for that model lineup.
All flagships.
Lots of expectation that Apple will blow through $100B revenue this next quarter; but I'm expecting even more than that, as I have posted.
I'm not against "bums on seats", but I, and Apple, don't see a process requiring high acquisition costs to counter an effort by Huawei, Samsung, or any other Android OS OEM, as a winning strategy, even in emerging countries.
As for the Kirin 980, I'm not seeing enough of an overall performance gain over an Apple A11 to be much of a threat to iPhone 8/8 Plus sales, and the rumors around the A12 are both that the "GPU is a beast", and that it will easily stave off any challengers, including the Kirin 980, and Exynos, and Snapdragon, processors coming out early next year.
Such is the nature of "competition".
, that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
They play nicely visually (and phonetically when pronounced incorrectly).
There are plenty of products with XS in the name and no one usually thinks of 'excess' when they read or here it.
I'm not convinced on the gold colour but I detest the rose and champagne variants so, depending on how it actually looks it might be ok if it isn't bling style. It would be amazing if the etched a colour mix like the one in the image on the screen onto the glass back. Especially as multi coloured gradient are so popular now.
That sounds like the script you have written to convince your wife to purchase the gold LCD X model as a replacement for her iPhone 6.
I have a dilemma with this actually. Last year she could have upgraded but chose to replace the battery. That gave her another year with the 6. The X was not on the table basically due to price. That left the 8 series or 7 series as candidates but they look 'old'.
When she saw my Honor 10 she said 'that's gorgeous!' so now I'm waiting to see pricing and sizes for iPhones without foreheads and chins in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping the rumours of an 'affordable' new phone prove to be true.
We can argue that a phone is just a phone but she is style conscious and in 2018, high screen to body ratios are the norm and as the phone will have to last her around three years, I wouldn't like her stuck with a big forehead and chin in 2020.
The LCD iPhone X model will be much more expensive than the Honor 10.
For sure. I'm just hoping the rumours prove true and one of the new phones is 'affordable' (even if it an Apple style definition of affordable).
Our family and social circle is dominated by Huawei/Honor phones. The sole iPhone is my wife's and there are a couple of oldish Samsungs.
She wants an iPhone and it would be nice for her to have one but we have been putting a lot of resources elsewhere and have plans for the next couple of years that make us think twice about certain things and one of them is phones.
If the Apple carrot is not close enough she could decide to hold out for another year or consider an Android.
She saw the Honor Magic 2 teaser from IFA today and commented favourably on the design.
She should buy an Android; she obviously doesn't care about Apple's ecosystem, and since the iPad Mini isn't going to be replaced by Apple, you should make a clean break.
Then all you have to do is get rid of your Mac, and the iPad, and you are entirely free of Apple's ecosystem.
That' really what you've been angling for, right?
How about competitively priced new products? Give me an iPad Mini 5 and new iPhone at an attractive price and we're onboard. Our iPads were competitive. No reason why new iPhones can't be either. Rumours are even pointing to exactly that. As for ecosystem. Nope. We are 'bad' Apple users as we do not subscribe to ANY Apple services.
The ecosystem does not refer to apple services, which they didn’t even have before not too long ago.
The iPhone is priced well, as even the highest models are best sellers. The market feels they’re fair, despite you wanting cheapies.
Meanings progress. The ecosystem today is hardware + OS + apps + services.
If the market felt that iPhone prices were fair I say Apple would have a far higher market share than it does.
It could also be that the ecosystem creates a need to be within Apple and people pay to continue having access to it. After all, I have seen a lot of people imply that the ecosystem itself is a kind of holding system, designed to reduce migration from it.
Anyway, if they lower pricing, the market will still consider it fair by your logic.
"Buffett explained that he loves Apple as an investment due to the power of its brand and ecosystem, not its short-term financial results.
"I do not focus on the sales in the next quarter or the next year," he said. "I focus on the ... hundreds, hundreds, hundreds millions of people who practically live their lives by it [iPhone]."
He also called the iPhone "enormously underpriced," saying that it's worth far more than the $1,000 Apple charges.
"I have a plane that costs me a lot, a million dollars a year or something of the sort. If I used the iPhone -- I use an iPad a lot -- if I used the iPhone like all my friends do, I would rather give up the plane," he said.
"Now it's got competition so you can't push the price, but in terms of its utility to people and what they get for a thousand dollars...you can have a dinner party that would cost that, and here this is, and what it does for you, it's incredible."
From a man that seems to have little contact with or understanding of the real world.
At least even he is admitting that competition is working. Someone should point him to a P20 Pro to see what he's missing. ;-)
I think he understands the real world just fine. He’s not saying that Apple can charge much more, or even that they should. He’s saying that from the use of the phone, you get much more than a $thousand worth out of it.
Which is a purely subjective and unquantifiable claim. By the same token I could claim that my sub €400 phone also gives me $1,000 worth but for $600 less. Of course, the longer you actually have the phone, that also changes its perceived value. Etc.
From an investment point of view of course, a 1,000 dollar phone means very little at this stage in the game. IMO, we are already in 'post iPhone' territory for revenues in the current business model.
Seeing as iPhone (as a hardware product) represented so much for the company, three consecutive flat years of unit sales means you accept that market realities are obstacles to unit growth and accept it, or you manoeuvre within those realities. Apple appears to be doing just that.
Apple's user base cannot sustain $1,000+ phones even for revenue growth. Gartner claimed last week that demand for the iPhone X had actually fallen off far sooner than for other Apple flagships of the past. That, IMO is normal as there are simply not that many customers who are able and/or willing to pay that amount. Of course being in the run up to a refresh has a negative impact too.
Another point is competition. Apple has faced fierce competition but not only on price. There are arguably better phones out there than the iPhone X that cost far less and even look better but I don't know if this refresh is really going to move the ball that much. We'll see in a couple of weeks, though. I'm very open.
But even with iPhone X, unit sales across the board once again seem to be flat, up to this point anyway. I think Apple will this year make another move to stimulate unit growth. Just as it did last year. Unit growth is necessary to widen its services base.
$1,000 phones existed before iPhone X and have a place in the lineup (even double the price) but I doubt a $1,000+ iPhone would see the same demand so soon after the first wave. If the rumours of price drops are true, unit sales might see some growth and revenues can be compensated via Services. I doubt we are far away from seeing Apple's home grown media content reaching users.
I basically disagree on much of what you’re saying. First, I never regard what Gardner, IDC, or others have to say. They are almost always wrong. There were predicting that Windows PCs sales would be rising again 5 years ago, and they were wrong then, and have been predicting it since then, and have been wrong each time. So their statements are not statements of fact, but statements of what they wish were the case.
It’s if everything else you feel said here is meh. The iPhone X has been the most popular model of phone around the world since it came out, and still is. I’d also like to see some proof about all those “better” phones. That’s a real joke.
Yeah, we disagree. I wouldn't be surprised if there were differing opinions within Apple too on all of these points, just as there are here and among analysts.
That said, that there are "better" phones out there is far from a joke. So far in fact that phones like the P20 Pro have not stopped receiving recognition of the fact. I've posted a lot of links here on that particular subject.
The fact that the iPhone X has (or hasn't) been the most popular model around the world says nothing at all. Apple released just three phones last year. Samsung probably released over thirty. Obviously, the less phones a top player releases, the more 'popular' they could prove.
What really counts is whether Apple feels that three years of flat unit growth is where it wants to be and how it plans to tackle that issue.
Obviously we are focusing on the handset side of the business here but that obviously overlaps with other areas.
We will see how things play out in two weeks but I feel they need to improve in four key areas where they have been lacking:
Battery Modem Camera Design
I think if you gave people the option of 'slow' wireless charging or a high capacity fast charging solution they would opt for the latter.
Apple modems haven't really been a tent pole feature. In fact the Kirin 970 was compared directly to Apple's flagship 2017 phones in several scenarios (including real world download speeds in San Francisco - at that time the Mate 10 was scheduled for a US rollout).
Cameras that take good photos are important but Apple is facing many competitors capable of taking good photos. Good enough by far for most consumers so something more is needed. The P20 Pro goes places no iPhone can. Things like x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AIIS, Night Mode).
This is with regards to real phones on the market today.
Those same phones are also experimenting with design, finish and colour and claiming some big wins in that area too. 'Twilight' is probably the one many seem to be following at this point in time. The iPhone range (chins and foreheads included) has suffered here. The exception being the iPhone X which isn't particularly head turning when placed alongside something like P20 Pro. Apple has found itself for the better part of 2018 with two very dated looking 'new' flagship phones.
There are other issues too. Why can't the 8 series use face unlock as a convenience option? Why can I be laying in bed, on the sofa or reclining in a chair with my 'cheap' phone and have it override screen rotation to keep things readable while no iPhone does this?
I hope Apple catches up in these areas this month even if prices don't get adjusted down.
One last point. Last year Honor presented and demoed its own take on 3D depth sensing including 10 times the precision, submillimetre scanning, 3D small object modelling with background, hand and palm removal, avatar creation based on facial data etc. Apple really should be implementing everything Honor revealed last year in its own second generation FaceID setup. Honor has yet to deploy its solution due to hardware cost reasons (it doesn't make $1,000 dollar phones) but prices are falling and by its own desire, Apple gets just one shot per year to 'deliver' and only on three phones. Anything not included in the refresh won't be dealt with until this time next year and there is a chance Honor might roll it out during 2019.
So, it's okay if Huawei doesn't implement a feature because of cost, but you consider it a problem for Apple, likely not for cost reasons, in my opinion, but because there isn't enough production capacity to actually produce the components that would be required for 150 million devices.
I remember when the iPhone X was released and you spend considerable effort stating that Huawei had the same access to Face ID components because they used them in telecom, but in truth, they weren't the right components for Huawei's equivalent of Face ID. Hence nothing comparable in Huawei's product lineup to date, and pretty much nothing at all for the rest of the Android OS device makers. Not rumored to arrive at all until component prices drop. Going back to Apple's iPhone X release, those same shortages likely impacted the FY Q1 revenues for Apple, even though those revenues were a record at $88 Billion. Given that the only noted shortages this go round are the screens for the LCD model, delaying its release slightly, I'm expecting those blowout revenues to happen. Apple would obviously love to implement those same functionalities on the backside for AR, in which Apple is fully ahead of Android OS devices, if those components were available in volume today. They aren't. As for cameras, specifically the triple lens models, those models are selling in such small numbers for the few Android OS device makers that have them, that it is hardly imperiling Apple to skip that this year, and launch in 2019. I'm always shocked, shocked, I say, when I confront person's as yourself pushing the high end models as "halo" devices, but not actually purchasing them. It's called eating your own dog food. Apple doesn't seem to have that problem with the iPhone X; people seem to be voting with their wallets.
The problem is that Avon, and others would rather believe the hype, and regard minor features as more important that actual functionality and value.
im also a,aged at how he defends Chinese manufacturers who hac]ve R&D and manufacturing’s costs that are exactly the same as anyone else’s, yet charge hundreds less. There’s a reason for that, yet, he refuses, as do other supporters of cheaper devices, to understand why these companies can do that, and it’s not due to their expertise. It’s called dumping, and it’s something that allowed the Japanese to get their industry used around the world.
How is Huawei dumping when it has increased handset prices in recent years and moved into higher and higher premium bands?
There R&D costs are not the same as everyone else's. They are historically higher.
Historically higher, for a company that is primarily Telecom, with enterprise, servers, and smartphones making up the balance.
It would appear that Apple is close enough in R&D expenditure such that Huawei doesn't have any market advantage, in smartphone and consumer electronics anyway, over Apple. It's not even close.
Apple is still going to end up with roughly half the world's smartphone revenue and likely some 80% of profits.
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Sure! So far, there’s no evidence that these systems are any better. That’s more hype. Can’t do two really good cameras, then put three lessor ones in. It’s amazing what some people will believe. When Samsung announced, this year, that they were going to have an aperture on a lens, I read a half dozen articles at how this would change everything with smartphone cameras. The phone comes out, and the cameras are tested, and what? The pictures are good, but no improvement with the aperture. Another phone came out a year or two ago with one B/W camera for resolution, and the other just for color indo. Well, that’s was going to be far better, all the fawning web sits stated, including a couple of the photo sites. What happened there? Surprisingly crappy pictures! There are other examples. Until a company can get something out the door, it’s vaporware. It’s why Apple doesn’t announce new features until they produce them.
another interesting this is that whenever there’s a rumor of Apple wanting to do something, other manufacturers jump on it quickly, hoping to get it out before Apple does, if possible. Adding another camera is fairly easy, so they can jump on it. So maybe Apple is working on this, on their own schedule, and will come out with it when they are ready, in such case, it will serve a purpose, and actually do something useful. Or, and this is just as likely, it’s just another rumor with no substance. I remember pretty well that Samsung, and others came out with 16NP cameras just a few years ago. Apple just came out with 12. Wow! 16MP will be so sharp! Except it was only under a few very well lit conditions, and only in the brighter portions of the image. Otherwise, the pictures were pretty bad. So what happened? While Apple was being tied to the rails for not having 16MP in their own camera, the others, very quietly, without the hype they used when going to 16MP, went back to 12MP.
so stop being so gullible and believing everything that these companies claim, just because, for whatever reason, you want to see Apple bashed.
There is no evidence these systems are any better?
Wow!
What exactly are you looking for?
When I said there things no other phone could do I wasn't making it up. Here are some of those, plus others.
X3 optical zoom is real. AIAS is real Night Mode is real. Monochrome sensor is real (if B/W is your thing) TüV Rheinland Battery Cert is real Reverse charging is real Supercharge is real Dual SIM and Dual simultaneous VoLTE are real Cat 18 (now 19) modem is real Ultra low temp operating conditions are real Huawei had its own take on portrait mode before it appeared on any iPhone (only to spend a year in beta when it did arrive). Etc.
A lot of this makes sense given Huawei's pedigree in areas like batteries, networking and imaging. Some of it might not be of use to you but it is very real, nonetheless.
For example, train travel might not be typical in the US but in Europe and China and Japan, high speed train travel is very common and brings its own set of problems. That's why things like call stability and cell tower handover were given so much attention in Huawei modems/phones with testing over thousands of kilometres. It's why Huawei is rolling out fibre optic systems for rail networks, etc
It has also made significant breakthroughs in battery technology, the last publicly announced breakthrough was increasing the operating temperature of lithium batteries by 10ºC while doubling the lifespan of the battery itself. That wasn't some PR claim. It was presented at a world battery symposium. Whatever the origin of a development, it will filter down to different divisions of the company if applicable. That is why my 'cheap' phone performs so well out of the box, when it comes to anything battery related. No extra chargers needed. In fact it has sensors in every link of the charging chain, cable included, plus a whole raft of safety gates for safe functioning.
If the iPhone can only go to x2 optical zoom but the P20 Pro can go to x3, in my book the P20 Pro is better.
Have you read about Night Mode and why people are raving about it?
I don't know why you say there is no 'evidence'.
If you hunt around you will see someone putting down the P20 Pro. There always is. However, for every one of those, you will find many, many more with a completely different viewpoint. Without being perfect (nothing is), in terms of doing many things (and in key areas) that other phones simply cannot do, means the evidence is there
"In terms of actual light capture, the P20 Pro’s massive sensor is just without competition. Both the hardware and the software processing make this easily the most competitive smartphone in low-light scenarios. At high ISO settings, we’re seeing astounding and never-before-seen results from a smartphone that really pushes the envelope of what can be done in a mobile device."
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Sure! So far, there’s no evidence that these systems are any better. That’s more hype. Can’t do two really good cameras, then put three lessor ones in. It’s amazing what some people will believe. When Samsung announced, this year, that they were going to have an aperture on a lens, I read a half dozen articles at how this would change everything with smartphone cameras. The phone comes out, and the cameras are tested, and what? The pictures are good, but no improvement with the aperture. Another phone came out a year or two ago with one B/W camera for resolution, and the other just for color indo. Well, that’s was going to be far better, all the fawning web sits stated, including a couple of the photo sites. What happened there? Surprisingly crappy pictures! There are other examples. Until a company can get something out the door, it’s vaporware. It’s why Apple doesn’t announce new features until they produce them.
another interesting this is that whenever there’s a rumor of Apple wanting to do something, other manufacturers jump on it quickly, hoping to get it out before Apple does, if possible. Adding another camera is fairly easy, so they can jump on it. So maybe Apple is working on this, on their own schedule, and will come out with it when they are ready, in such case, it will serve a purpose, and actually do something useful. Or, and this is just as likely, it’s just another rumor with no substance. I remember pretty well that Samsung, and others came out with 16NP cameras just a few years ago. Apple just came out with 12. Wow! 16MP will be so sharp! Except it was only under a few very well lit conditions, and only in the brighter portions of the image. Otherwise, the pictures were pretty bad. So what happened? While Apple was being tied to the rails for not having 16MP in their own camera, the others, very quietly, without the hype they used when going to 16MP, went back to 12MP.
so stop being so gullible and believing everything that these companies claim, just because, for whatever reason, you want to see Apple bashed.
There is no evidence these systems are any better?
Wow!
What exactly are you looking for?
When I said there things no other phone could do I wasn't making it up. Here are some of those, plus others.
X3 optical zoom is real. AIAS is real Night Mode is real. Monochrome sensor is real (if B/W is your thing) TüV Rheinland Battery Cert is real Reverse charging is real Supercharge is real Dual SIM and Dual simultaneous VoLTE are real Cat 18 (now 19) modem is real Ultra low temp operating conditions are real Huawei had its own take on portrait mode before it appeared on any iPhone (only to spend a year in beta when it did arrive). Etc.
A lot of this makes sense given Huawei's pedigree in areas like batteries, networking and imaging. Some of it might not be of use to you but it is very real, nonetheless.
For example, train travel might not be typical in the US but in Europe and China and Japan, high speed train travel is very common and brings its own set of problems. That's why things like call stability and cell tower handover were given so much attention in Huawei modems/phones with testing over thousands of kilometres. It's why Huawei is rolling out fibre optic systems for rail networks, etc
It has also made significant breakthroughs in battery technology, the last publicly announced breakthrough was increasing the operating temperature of lithium batteries by 10ºC while doubling the lifespan of the battery itself. That wasn't some PR claim. It was presented at a world battery symposium. Whatever the origin of a development, it will filter down to different divisions of the company if applicable. That is why my 'cheap' phone performs so well out of the box, when it comes to anything battery related. No extra chargers needed. In fact it has sensors in every link of the charging chain, cable included, plus a whole raft of safety gates for safe functioning.
If the iPhone can only go to x2 optical zoom but the P20 Pro can go to x3, in my book the P20 Pro is better.
Have you read about Night Mode and why people are raving about it?
I don't know why you say there is no 'evidence'.
If you hunt around you will see someone putting down the P20 Pro. There always is. However, for every one of those, you will find many, many more with a completely different viewpoint. Without being perfect (nothing is), in terms of doing many things (and in key areas) that other phones simply cannot do, means the evidence is there
"In terms of actual light capture, the P20 Pro’s massive sensor is just without competition. Both the hardware and the software processing make this easily the most competitive smartphone in low-light scenarios. At high ISO settings, we’re seeing astounding and never-before-seen results from a smartphone that really pushes the envelope of what can be done in a mobile device."
As I've said before; nice "Halo" product, but Apple will sell 100 million and more dual imager systems this year, and another 50 million and more of the single imager, just for the new models. Very few people buy "Halo" products, but people sure like talking about them, right?
Apple knows it's markets, so isn't worried about being "late" to triple lenses, or most of the other features that you have listed.
I'll be happy to say "Huawei wins" when they actually win, but, I'm not seeing those features as "winning", and I told you why many times;
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Sure! So far, there’s no evidence that these systems are any better. That’s more hype. Can’t do two really good cameras, then put three lessor ones in. It’s amazing what some people will believe. When Samsung announced, this year, that they were going to have an aperture on a lens, I read a half dozen articles at how this would change everything with smartphone cameras. The phone comes out, and the cameras are tested, and what? The pictures are good, but no improvement with the aperture. Another phone came out a year or two ago with one B/W camera for resolution, and the other just for color indo. Well, that’s was going to be far better, all the fawning web sits stated, including a couple of the photo sites. What happened there? Surprisingly crappy pictures! There are other examples. Until a company can get something out the door, it’s vaporware. It’s why Apple doesn’t announce new features until they produce them.
another interesting this is that whenever there’s a rumor of Apple wanting to do something, other manufacturers jump on it quickly, hoping to get it out before Apple does, if possible. Adding another camera is fairly easy, so they can jump on it. So maybe Apple is working on this, on their own schedule, and will come out with it when they are ready, in such case, it will serve a purpose, and actually do something useful. Or, and this is just as likely, it’s just another rumor with no substance. I remember pretty well that Samsung, and others came out with 16NP cameras just a few years ago. Apple just came out with 12. Wow! 16MP will be so sharp! Except it was only under a few very well lit conditions, and only in the brighter portions of the image. Otherwise, the pictures were pretty bad. So what happened? While Apple was being tied to the rails for not having 16MP in their own camera, the others, very quietly, without the hype they used when going to 16MP, went back to 12MP.
so stop being so gullible and believing everything that these companies claim, just because, for whatever reason, you want to see Apple bashed.
There is no evidence these systems are any better?
Wow!
What exactly are you looking for?
When I said there things no other phone could do I wasn't making it up. Here are some of those, plus others.
X3 optical zoom is real. AIAS is real Night Mode is real. Monochrome sensor is real (if B/W is your thing) TüV Rheinland Battery Cert is real Reverse charging is real Supercharge is real Dual SIM and Dual simultaneous VoLTE are real Cat 18 (now 19) modem is real Ultra low temp operating conditions are real Huawei had its own take on portrait mode before it appeared on any iPhone (only to spend a year in beta when it did arrive). Etc.
A lot of this makes sense given Huawei's pedigree in areas like batteries, networking and imaging. Some of it might not be of use to you but it is very real, nonetheless.
For example, train travel might not be typical in the US but in Europe and China and Japan, high speed train travel is very common and brings its own set of problems. That's why things like call stability and cell tower handover were given so much attention in Huawei modems/phones with testing over thousands of kilometres. It's why Huawei is rolling out fibre optic systems for rail networks, etc
It has also made significant breakthroughs in battery technology, the last publicly announced breakthrough was increasing the operating temperature of lithium batteries by 10ºC while doubling the lifespan of the battery itself. That wasn't some PR claim. It was presented at a world battery symposium. Whatever the origin of a development, it will filter down to different divisions of the company if applicable. That is why my 'cheap' phone performs so well out of the box, when it comes to anything battery related. No extra chargers needed. In fact it has sensors in every link of the charging chain, cable included, plus a whole raft of safety gates for safe functioning.
If the iPhone can only go to x2 optical zoom but the P20 Pro can go to x3, in my book the P20 Pro is better.
Have you read about Night Mode and why people are raving about it?
I don't know why you say there is no 'evidence'.
If you hunt around you will see someone putting down the P20 Pro. There always is. However, for every one of those, you will find many, many more with a completely different viewpoint. Without being perfect (nothing is), in terms of doing many things (and in key areas) that other phones simply cannot do, means the evidence is there
"In terms of actual light capture, the P20 Pro’s massive sensor is just without competition. Both the hardware and the software processing make this easily the most competitive smartphone in low-light scenarios. At high ISO settings, we’re seeing astounding and never-before-seen results from a smartphone that really pushes the envelope of what can be done in a mobile device."
As I've said before; nice "Halo" product, but Apple will sell 100 million and more dual imager systems this year, and another 50 million and more of the single imager, just for the new models. Very few people buy "Halo" products, but people sure like talking about them, right?
Apple knows it's markets, so isn't worried about being "late" to triple lenses, or most of the other features that you have listed.
I'll be happy to say "Huawei wins" when they actually win, but, I'm not seeing those features as "winning", and I told you why many times;
Diffusion.
Fine. We can disagree on what it 'represents' (that's just our opinions and each to their own, as they say) but the 'evidence' of being 'better' is basically something that we shouldn't be doubting the P20 Pro on (at least on the tangible aspects like battery, modem and optical zoom etc). And we're talking about key areas of modern day smartphones (the real bread and butter of phone use), not secondary elements.
The P20 series (excluding Lite) is now over 10,000,000 units in just five months. Some halo! Same with Mate 10 series and let's not forget that with the exception of the third camera, much of those key advantages were actually available last year on that series. They have been improved on the P20 Pro but the improvements were backported to the Mate 10 series. Even my 'cheap' phone got Night Mode through an update (they share the same SoC) and although the camera hardware isn't the same as that on the P20 series, it's still very nice to have.
It's good that people will be comparing the new iPhones to the P20 Pro as an established 'phone to beat' because it means competition is working. Although the new iPhones will also face the Mate 20 a just a few weeks after they are presented so the competition will be hot.
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Sure! So far, there’s no evidence that these systems are any better. That’s more hype. Can’t do two really good cameras, then put three lessor ones in. It’s amazing what some people will believe. When Samsung announced, this year, that they were going to have an aperture on a lens, I read a half dozen articles at how this would change everything with smartphone cameras. The phone comes out, and the cameras are tested, and what? The pictures are good, but no improvement with the aperture. Another phone came out a year or two ago with one B/W camera for resolution, and the other just for color indo. Well, that’s was going to be far better, all the fawning web sits stated, including a couple of the photo sites. What happened there? Surprisingly crappy pictures! There are other examples. Until a company can get something out the door, it’s vaporware. It’s why Apple doesn’t announce new features until they produce them.
another interesting this is that whenever there’s a rumor of Apple wanting to do something, other manufacturers jump on it quickly, hoping to get it out before Apple does, if possible. Adding another camera is fairly easy, so they can jump on it. So maybe Apple is working on this, on their own schedule, and will come out with it when they are ready, in such case, it will serve a purpose, and actually do something useful. Or, and this is just as likely, it’s just another rumor with no substance. I remember pretty well that Samsung, and others came out with 16NP cameras just a few years ago. Apple just came out with 12. Wow! 16MP will be so sharp! Except it was only under a few very well lit conditions, and only in the brighter portions of the image. Otherwise, the pictures were pretty bad. So what happened? While Apple was being tied to the rails for not having 16MP in their own camera, the others, very quietly, without the hype they used when going to 16MP, went back to 12MP.
so stop being so gullible and believing everything that these companies claim, just because, for whatever reason, you want to see Apple bashed.
There is no evidence these systems are any better?
Wow!
What exactly are you looking for?
When I said there things no other phone could do I wasn't making it up. Here are some of those, plus others.
X3 optical zoom is real. AIAS is real Night Mode is real. Monochrome sensor is real (if B/W is your thing) TüV Rheinland Battery Cert is real Reverse charging is real Supercharge is real Dual SIM and Dual simultaneous VoLTE are real Cat 18 (now 19) modem is real Ultra low temp operating conditions are real Huawei had its own take on portrait mode before it appeared on any iPhone (only to spend a year in beta when it did arrive). Etc.
A lot of this makes sense given Huawei's pedigree in areas like batteries, networking and imaging. Some of it might not be of use to you but it is very real, nonetheless.
For example, train travel might not be typical in the US but in Europe and China and Japan, high speed train travel is very common and brings its own set of problems. That's why things like call stability and cell tower handover were given so much attention in Huawei modems/phones with testing over thousands of kilometres. It's why Huawei is rolling out fibre optic systems for rail networks, etc
It has also made significant breakthroughs in battery technology, the last publicly announced breakthrough was increasing the operating temperature of lithium batteries by 10ºC while doubling the lifespan of the battery itself. That wasn't some PR claim. It was presented at a world battery symposium. Whatever the origin of a development, it will filter down to different divisions of the company if applicable. That is why my 'cheap' phone performs so well out of the box, when it comes to anything battery related. No extra chargers needed. In fact it has sensors in every link of the charging chain, cable included, plus a whole raft of safety gates for safe functioning.
If the iPhone can only go to x2 optical zoom but the P20 Pro can go to x3, in my book the P20 Pro is better.
Have you read about Night Mode and why people are raving about it?
I don't know why you say there is no 'evidence'.
If you hunt around you will see someone putting down the P20 Pro. There always is. However, for every one of those, you will find many, many more with a completely different viewpoint. Without being perfect (nothing is), in terms of doing many things (and in key areas) that other phones simply cannot do, means the evidence is there
"In terms of actual light capture, the P20 Pro’s massive sensor is just without competition. Both the hardware and the software processing make this easily the most competitive smartphone in low-light scenarios. At high ISO settings, we’re seeing astounding and never-before-seen results from a smartphone that really pushes the envelope of what can be done in a mobile device."
As I've said before; nice "Halo" product, but Apple will sell 100 million and more dual imager systems this year, and another 50 million and more of the single imager, just for the new models. Very few people buy "Halo" products, but people sure like talking about them, right?
Apple knows it's markets, so isn't worried about being "late" to triple lenses, or most of the other features that you have listed.
I'll be happy to say "Huawei wins" when they actually win, but, I'm not seeing those features as "winning", and I told you why many times;
Diffusion.
Fine. We can disagree on what it 'represents' (that's just our opinions and each to their own, as they say) but the 'evidence' of being 'better' is basically something that we shouldn't be doubting the P20 Pro on (at least on the tangible aspects like battery, modem and optical zoom etc). And we're talking about key areas of modern day smartphones (the real bread and butter of phone use), not secondary elements.
The P20 series (excluding Lite) is now over 10,000,000 units in just five months. Some halo! Same with Mate 10 series and let's not forget that with the exception of the third camera, much of those key advantages were actually available last year on that series. They have been improved on the P20 Pro but the improvements were backported to the Mate 10 series. Even my 'cheap' phone got Night Mode through an update (they share the same SoC) and although the camera hardware isn't the same as that on the P20 series, it's still very nice to have.
It's good that people will be comparing the new iPhones to the P20 Pro as an established 'phone to beat' because it means competition is working. Although the new iPhones will also face the Mate 20 a just a few weeks after they are presented so the competition will be hot.
So here's my response to that "9M" from a previous thread on Huawei becoming number two in unit sales for the quarter;
Okay, the following link that you just gave me states the 9 million, which includes P20 Lite, P20, and P20 Pro:
"Yu did announce shipment numbers, and the company's last two flagships each saw significant growth compared to previous generations: Huawei's flagship P20 series shipped a total of 9 million units so far in four months of release, while the Mate 10 series, which is close to a year old, has shipped a total of 10 million devices. Yu said the Mate 10 should finish at around the 11 million mark".
That's from the link that you gave me, Are you now disavowing its accuracy?
You mean to say that Apple really needs to implement all the tech demoed by a competitor who hasn’t figured out how to bring it to market?
O-kayyyyyy
In January, Honor said cost was the only reason, not 'figuring it out'. Costs are coming down, that's why I mentioned it.
You and I have very different definitions of “bringing something to the market”.
Not being able to produce it at acceptable cost is by definition “not having figured out how to bring it to market”.
But you are right: Apple is the company that figures out how to sell utopian stuff — by both figuring out how to make it useful, and by figuring how how to build it so that they can actually sell it.
Ever wondered why Apple could be so far behind in the triple camera stakes? For the same reasons.
They couldn't figure it out I suppose.
People claim Apple's triple camera won't ship until late 2019. I'm not so sure myself, but consensus says it's coming all the same.
There is no magic involved in a workable triple camera setup. No component issues.
Size isn't an issue. Nor thickness.
So why is such a major selling point - one that has literally pulled the rug out from under Samsung's and Apple's feet in terms of limelight - being left so late with all the benefits it could bring?
It could be cost, it could be planning, it could be something else but, according to your logic, they couldn't figure it out!
Sure! So far, there’s no evidence that these systems are any better. That’s more hype. Can’t do two really good cameras, then put three lessor ones in. It’s amazing what some people will believe. When Samsung announced, this year, that they were going to have an aperture on a lens, I read a half dozen articles at how this would change everything with smartphone cameras. The phone comes out, and the cameras are tested, and what? The pictures are good, but no improvement with the aperture. Another phone came out a year or two ago with one B/W camera for resolution, and the other just for color indo. Well, that’s was going to be far better, all the fawning web sits stated, including a couple of the photo sites. What happened there? Surprisingly crappy pictures! There are other examples. Until a company can get something out the door, it’s vaporware. It’s why Apple doesn’t announce new features until they produce them.
another interesting this is that whenever there’s a rumor of Apple wanting to do something, other manufacturers jump on it quickly, hoping to get it out before Apple does, if possible. Adding another camera is fairly easy, so they can jump on it. So maybe Apple is working on this, on their own schedule, and will come out with it when they are ready, in such case, it will serve a purpose, and actually do something useful. Or, and this is just as likely, it’s just another rumor with no substance. I remember pretty well that Samsung, and others came out with 16NP cameras just a few years ago. Apple just came out with 12. Wow! 16MP will be so sharp! Except it was only under a few very well lit conditions, and only in the brighter portions of the image. Otherwise, the pictures were pretty bad. So what happened? While Apple was being tied to the rails for not having 16MP in their own camera, the others, very quietly, without the hype they used when going to 16MP, went back to 12MP.
so stop being so gullible and believing everything that these companies claim, just because, for whatever reason, you want to see Apple bashed.
There is no evidence these systems are any better?
Wow!
What exactly are you looking for?
When I said there things no other phone could do I wasn't making it up. Here are some of those, plus others.
X3 optical zoom is real. AIAS is real Night Mode is real. Monochrome sensor is real (if B/W is your thing) TüV Rheinland Battery Cert is real Reverse charging is real Supercharge is real Dual SIM and Dual simultaneous VoLTE are real Cat 18 (now 19) modem is real Ultra low temp operating conditions are real Huawei had its own take on portrait mode before it appeared on any iPhone (only to spend a year in beta when it did arrive). Etc.
A lot of this makes sense given Huawei's pedigree in areas like batteries, networking and imaging. Some of it might not be of use to you but it is very real, nonetheless.
For example, train travel might not be typical in the US but in Europe and China and Japan, high speed train travel is very common and brings its own set of problems. That's why things like call stability and cell tower handover were given so much attention in Huawei modems/phones with testing over thousands of kilometres. It's why Huawei is rolling out fibre optic systems for rail networks, etc
It has also made significant breakthroughs in battery technology, the last publicly announced breakthrough was increasing the operating temperature of lithium batteries by 10ºC while doubling the lifespan of the battery itself. That wasn't some PR claim. It was presented at a world battery symposium. Whatever the origin of a development, it will filter down to different divisions of the company if applicable. That is why my 'cheap' phone performs so well out of the box, when it comes to anything battery related. No extra chargers needed. In fact it has sensors in every link of the charging chain, cable included, plus a whole raft of safety gates for safe functioning.
If the iPhone can only go to x2 optical zoom but the P20 Pro can go to x3, in my book the P20 Pro is better.
Have you read about Night Mode and why people are raving about it?
I don't know why you say there is no 'evidence'.
If you hunt around you will see someone putting down the P20 Pro. There always is. However, for every one of those, you will find many, many more with a completely different viewpoint. Without being perfect (nothing is), in terms of doing many things (and in key areas) that other phones simply cannot do, means the evidence is there
"In terms of actual light capture, the P20 Pro’s massive sensor is just without competition. Both the hardware and the software processing make this easily the most competitive smartphone in low-light scenarios. At high ISO settings, we’re seeing astounding and never-before-seen results from a smartphone that really pushes the envelope of what can be done in a mobile device."
As I've said before; nice "Halo" product, but Apple will sell 100 million and more dual imager systems this year, and another 50 million and more of the single imager, just for the new models. Very few people buy "Halo" products, but people sure like talking about them, right?
Apple knows it's markets, so isn't worried about being "late" to triple lenses, or most of the other features that you have listed.
I'll be happy to say "Huawei wins" when they actually win, but, I'm not seeing those features as "winning", and I told you why many times;
Diffusion.
Fine. We can disagree on what it 'represents' (that's just our opinions and each to their own, as they say) but the 'evidence' of being 'better' is basically something that we shouldn't be doubting the P20 Pro on (at least on the tangible aspects like battery, modem and optical zoom etc). And we're talking about key areas of modern day smartphones (the real bread and butter of phone use), not secondary elements.
The P20 series (excluding Lite) is now over 10,000,000 units in just five months. Some halo! Same with Mate 10 series and let's not forget that with the exception of the third camera, much of those key advantages were actually available last year on that series. They have been improved on the P20 Pro but the improvements were backported to the Mate 10 series. Even my 'cheap' phone got Night Mode through an update (they share the same SoC) and although the camera hardware isn't the same as that on the P20 series, it's still very nice to have.
It's good that people will be comparing the new iPhones to the P20 Pro as an established 'phone to beat' because it means competition is working. Although the new iPhones will also face the Mate 20 a just a few weeks after they are presented so the competition will be hot.
So here's my response to that "9M" from a previous thread on Huawei becoming number two in unit sales for the quarter;
Okay, the following link that you just gave me states the 9 million, which includes P20 Lite, P20, and P20 Pro:
"Yu did announce shipment numbers, and the company's last two flagships each saw significant growth compared to previous generations: Huawei's flagship P20 series shipped a total of 9 million units so far in four months of release, while the Mate 10 series, which is close to a year old, has shipped a total of 10 million devices. Yu said the Mate 10 should finish at around the 11 million mark".
That's from the link that you gave me, Are you now disavowing its accuracy?
Oh dear. Your obsession again. LOL.
I have answered you every single time with the data I've had to hand. Includingtheotherthread.
They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Maybe you'll let it go now:
In an after show media briefing Yu confirmed the 10,000,000 + figure and put expected P20 and P20 Pro sales at 15,000,000 for the year and over 20,000,000 including the Lite version.
Hi. The P20 is selling well and has probably the best camera on any smartphone.
Can you please take your penises off the table and put them away? You’re scaring the children, and they’re really just here because they’re excited over the new iPhone they’ve heard is coming next Wednesday.
Hi. The P20 is selling well and has probably the best camera on any smartphone.
Can you please take your penises off the table and put them away? You’re scaring the children, and they’re really just here because they’re excited over the new iPhone they’ve heard is coming next Wednesday.
Ha! Well count me in on the excitement. My wife needs a new iPhone but I'm excited by the 'affordable' rumour. Anything they announce will be a major upgrade for her from a 6.
Comments
It comes down to, I suppose:
— not being able to figure it out vs.
— not bothering to figure it out vs.
— having figured it out and not doing it anyway vs.
— having figured it out and just waiting until the time is right (the market is ready, the cost is right, capacity is there).
The problem is that Avon, and others would rather believe the hype, and regard minor features as more important that actual functionality and value.
im also a,aged at how he defends Chinese manufacturers who hac]ve R&D and manufacturing’s costs that are exactly the same as anyone else’s, yet charge hundreds less. There’s a reason for that, yet, he refuses, as do other supporters of cheaper devices, to understand why these companies can do that, and it’s not due to their expertise. It’s called dumping, and it’s something that allowed the Japanese to get their industry used around the world.
The smartphone industry, worldwide, has seen dropping sales the last two years, so flat sales is a victory.
you, and many others, unfortunately, fail to understand what happened with Apple salesseveral years ago when the 6/6+ came out. That year, sales leaped by an astounding 49%. Where do you think much of that came from? In addition to those coming from Android in larger numbers than usual, people who were going to upgrade the next year, and even the year after, upgraded then instead. Anyone who expected bigger sales the next year simply didn’t understand that dynamic. The year after saw better sales than the year after, and this year, sales are better still. But Apple is still seeing the hangover from that year.
i ignite these who are making predictions, and evaluate the past, because most of them are, quite frankly, idiots. And those who believe them are not far behind. Apple will have a pretty good year with these new phones, believe anything else, and you’re showing ignorance.
Sure! So far, there’s no evidence that these systems are any better. That’s more hype. Can’t do two really good cameras, then put three lessor ones in. It’s amazing what some people will believe. When Samsung announced, this year, that they were going to have an aperture on a lens, I read a half dozen articles at how this would change everything with smartphone cameras. The phone comes out, and the cameras are tested, and what? The pictures are good, but no improvement with the aperture. Another phone came out a year or two ago with one B/W camera for resolution, and the other just for color indo. Well, that’s was going to be far better, all the fawning web sits stated, including a couple of the photo sites. What happened there? Surprisingly crappy pictures! There are other examples. Until a company can get something out the door, it’s vaporware. It’s why Apple doesn’t announce new features until they produce them.
another interesting this is that whenever there’s a rumor of Apple wanting to do something, other manufacturers jump on it quickly, hoping to get it out before Apple does, if possible. Adding another camera is fairly easy, so they can jump on it. So maybe Apple is working on this, on their own schedule, and will come out with it when they are ready, in such case, it will serve a purpose, and actually do something useful. Or, and this is just as likely, it’s just another rumor with no substance. I remember pretty well that Samsung, and others came out with 16NP cameras just a few years ago. Apple just came out with 12. Wow! 16MP will be so sharp! Except it was only under a few very well lit conditions, and only in the brighter portions of the image. Otherwise, the pictures were pretty bad. So what happened? While Apple was being tied to the rails for not having 16MP in their own camera, the others, very quietly, without the hype they used when going to 16MP, went back to 12MP.
so stop being so gullible and believing everything that these companies claim, just because, for whatever reason, you want to see Apple bashed.
Avon's error is how Android OS devices compete with Apple, not just with the iPhone. It isn't much, and is almost certainly due to price, and that nebulous "open", more so that the bragging rights of a few "halo" features of limited real world utility.
I'm more than happy to watch Huawei sell (dump) product into an Android OS marketplace that has little growth other than a few emerging markets. It's a zero sum game with high acquisition costs and low brand loyalty. Aspiration users, will still trend towards Apple; if not today, then tomorrow or the next year.
5G is certainly another technology that is overhyped in the device market, today anyway. Model's hyping it as "future proofing" are really going to best serve the narrow group of people that are willing to put up with the lengthy implementation problems. That isn't the general public.
There R&D costs are not the same as everyone else's. They are historically higher.
Please explain how that happens if Huawei is selling more expensive products.
I'll be happy to find the link again.
Here it is;
https://www.zdnet.com/article/huawei-and-xiaomi-smartphone-shares-surge-in-europe-amid-market-decline/
"Canalys also indicated that Huawei's primary shipments in the quarter are cheaper handsets due to a delay of its expensive flagship P20 phones. Although Huawei's shipments expanded nearly 40 percent in the quarter, it only managed to boost its shipment value by 1.7 percent over the previous year. Conversely, the high price of the Galaxy S9, as well as its earlier launch in the calendar year than the Galaxy S8, helped Samsung boost its shipment value by over 20 percent, according to the research agency."
A few weeks after Apple released FaceID they revealed their own take and gave a lot of details. An engineer from Honor even demoed a 3D face scan in real time while casually walking around a show floor. All prototype stuff and pretty ugly hardware but totally normal becsuse they obviously weren't going to release it on an unreleased phone.
What makes things 'very likely'?
We know 3D depth sensing is expensive. We know that cost is the reason they gave. Shouldn't we give them the benefit of the doubt at least?
Once Apple had a production source of Face ID components (they even gave one U.S. company $300 m to build factory), and had it incorporated into it's iPhones, at best, in-screen TouchID would have been less secure, and hence was deprecated.
I highly doubt that Apple will every revisit TouchID, of any kind, for any new iPhones, and it isn't because of incremental costs.
FaceID is superior for security, which makes me wonder why Huawei hasn't at least offered something at least equivalent to what Apple has provided. There's no innovation if you don't ship it to customers that are buying the very products that have it.
Huawei didn't do it because they couldn't source the components; either too costly/unavailable or both. Apple delivered, in volume, and I expect another 150 million iPhones with FaceID to be sold this year.
What's Huawei waiting for?
It would appear that Apple is close enough in R&D expenditure such that Huawei doesn't have any market advantage, in smartphone and consumer electronics anyway, over Apple. It's not even close.
Apple is still going to end up with roughly half the world's smartphone revenue and likely some 80% of profits.
Wow!
What exactly are you looking for?
When I said there things no other phone could do I wasn't making it up. Here are some of those, plus others.
X3 optical zoom is real.
AIAS is real
Night Mode is real.
Monochrome sensor is real (if B/W is your thing)
TüV Rheinland Battery Cert is real
Reverse charging is real
Supercharge is real
Dual SIM and Dual simultaneous VoLTE are real
Cat 18 (now 19) modem is real
Ultra low temp operating conditions are real
Huawei had its own take on portrait mode before it appeared on any iPhone (only to spend a year in beta when it did arrive).
Etc.
A lot of this makes sense given Huawei's pedigree in areas like batteries, networking and imaging. Some of it might not be of use to you but it is very real, nonetheless.
For example, train travel might not be typical in the US but in Europe and China and Japan, high speed train travel is very common and brings its own set of problems. That's why things like call stability and cell tower handover were given so much attention in Huawei modems/phones with testing over thousands of kilometres. It's why Huawei is rolling out fibre optic systems for rail networks, etc
It has also made significant breakthroughs in battery technology, the last publicly announced breakthrough was increasing the operating temperature of lithium batteries by 10ºC while doubling the lifespan of the battery itself. That wasn't some PR claim. It was presented at a world battery symposium. Whatever the origin of a development, it will filter down to different divisions of the company if applicable. That is why my 'cheap' phone performs so well out of the box, when it comes to anything battery related. No extra chargers needed. In fact it has sensors in every link of the charging chain, cable included, plus a whole raft of safety gates for safe functioning.
If the iPhone can only go to x2 optical zoom but the P20 Pro can go to x3, in my book the P20 Pro is better.
Have you read about Night Mode and why people are raving about it?
I don't know why you say there is no 'evidence'.
If you hunt around you will see someone putting down the P20 Pro. There always is. However, for every one of those, you will find many, many more with a completely different viewpoint. Without being perfect (nothing is), in terms of doing many things (and in key areas) that other phones simply cannot do, means the evidence is there
"In terms of actual light capture, the P20 Pro’s massive sensor is just without competition. Both the hardware and the software processing make this easily the most competitive smartphone in low-light scenarios. At high ISO settings, we’re seeing astounding and never-before-seen results from a smartphone that really pushes the envelope of what can be done in a mobile device."
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12676/the-huawei-p20-p20-pro-review/8
Apple knows it's markets, so isn't worried about being "late" to triple lenses, or most of the other features that you have listed.
I'll be happy to say "Huawei wins" when they actually win, but, I'm not seeing those features as "winning", and I told you why many times;
Diffusion.
The P20 series (excluding Lite) is now over 10,000,000 units in just five months. Some halo! Same with Mate 10 series and let's not forget that with the exception of the third camera, much of those key advantages were actually available last year on that series. They have been improved on the P20 Pro but the improvements were backported to the Mate 10 series. Even my 'cheap' phone got Night Mode through an update (they share the same SoC) and although the camera hardware isn't the same as that on the P20 series, it's still very nice to have.
It's good that people will be comparing the new iPhones to the P20 Pro as an established 'phone to beat' because it means competition is working. Although the new iPhones will also face the Mate 20 a just a few weeks after they are presented so the competition will be hot.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/08/03/huaweis-consumer-business-chief-talks-market-share-sales-kirin-980-and-mate-20/#207febe26117
"Yu did announce shipment numbers, and the company's last two flagships each saw significant growth compared to previous generations: Huawei's flagship P20 series shipped a total of 9 million units so far in four months of release, while the Mate 10 series, which is close to a year old, has shipped a total of 10 million devices. Yu said the Mate 10 should finish at around the 11 million mark".
That's from the link that you gave me, Are you now disavowing its accuracy?
I have answered you every single time with the data I've had to hand. Including the other thread.
They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Maybe you'll let it go now:
https://images.anandtech.com/doci/13302/1535718707050594758994.jpg
In an after show media briefing Yu confirmed the 10,000,000 + figure and put expected P20 and P20 Pro sales at 15,000,000 for the year and over 20,000,000 including the Lite version.
Can you please take your penises off the table and put them away? You’re scaring the children, and they’re really just here because they’re excited over the new iPhone they’ve heard is coming next Wednesday.