Here's some more "oxymorons" I've noticed from the iKnockoff crowd:
"Apple is too expensive" But criticizes Apple for not adding more to the XR. Like how it needs a 1080p screen(for some reason), OLED etc. which would drive the price much higher.
Ostrich and sand??? With the benefit of hindsight, it is now easy to figure out that Apple got it wrong with respect to features and pricing of Xr. Xr is supposed to be the successor to iPhone 8 plus, but it was a side grade (design and SoC upgraded, display and camera downgraded), not a proper upgrade. It still would have been fine if Apple had priced it accordingly. But that didn't happen, hence Apple trying hard with promotional offers to increase sales. And revenue shortage purely due to lack of iphone sales. To even deny these basic facts is to keep the head firmly in the sand like an ostrich.
While I do think that the display was down graded(the display on th 8plus was 401 ppi while the XR display is 326 ppi) and the intel modem is a cheaper alternative to the Qualcomm modems, the Camera in the XR is a significant upgrade with a sensor which is 30% bigger than last years. It’s considered better than the camera in last years IphoneX . I was listening to a John Gruber Talk Show podcast from last year with Nilay Patel and they raved about how much better it was for photos and the Best for Video. I love the colors and If it had the 401 ppi screen would have upgraded to it. Hopefully they will add more colors to the XS and XSMax successors.
Philip Elmer-DeWitt today on 4 things he learned from Apple's guidance update:
• Don't trust Apple's guidance. Sure, Steve Jobs used to sandbag investors, guiding low, coming in high. I thought I could take Tim Cook's numbers (or his silence) to the bank. Now I know better.
• Don't be too quick to call FUD. Not all negative reports are created equal. Sometimes there's good reason to have fear, uncertainty and doubt.
• Case in point: Lumentum's revised guidance. When Lumentum's announced in November that a major supplier (almost certainly Apple) had sharply reduced orders for 3D imaging components, I posted several items about analystsreducingestimates. "Could be a bad sign," I wrote. But then I gave more than equal weight to the possibility that Apple had simply switched suppliers.
• Stick to the facts; don't sugar-coat. Apple investors may prefer reading good news about the company, but I'm not doing anyone any favors by putting my thumb on the scale.
The author who gives us line like "Apple note sends media pundits into a fit of historic gibberish", "cynically-cliche idea that Apple is working to sabotage existing devices with fatty iOS releases and battery shenanigans" and "trite word salad" doesn't know what it means when Swisher writes ""Apple has hung the moon for investors for so long now that the idea of the company struggling sent the entire global stock market into a paroxysm of fear and plunging indexes," Oh the irony!
All of these points that are made are all well and good, but the main point that is not being addressed is Apple missed their own projections. Sure it can happen, but with Cook and co running Apple now, missing a projection is like a concert pianist hitting the wrong notes during a performance.
Yes, the media likes to make Apple their whipping boy, but anyone who has been an Apple supporter since the 90’s and earlier knows this.
The upside to all of this is that Apple does perform better under pressure when making consumer products.
In fairness, DED, we’ve seen a ~40% drop (from $232 to $142 in price per share) in the market cap of the most successful company in the world, the first one to hit a trillion dollar mark. Nearly $475B is market value has been wiped out.
Surely, some of the hyperventilation is justified?
I find this whole article hilarious because DED did not predict the collapse in revenue before it was disclosed. I think it would be great if AppleInsider hired a writer based in HongKong to Cover China and Asia. Might have provided clues that this was coming. It’s called getting a scoop something that DED has never done because he’s too busy attacking other writers. For what it’s worth I’m predicting Apple shipped 65 million phones for $52 Billion in revenue out of the 84 Billion in revenue stated by Tim Cook. I don’t believe the entire down turn in Phones is due to China - probably two-thirds. But if people aren’t buying phones many are buying watches, AirPods, and HomePods.
Are HomePods a success? On one hand there were a ton of $100 off sales for the HomePod , a product still in its first year. On the other hand most of those people picking up HP probably have Apple Music and this will turn into continuing services revenue. I await the DED article?
A 5-9% retraction in revenue guidance is not a collapse in revenue. A > 5% drop in revenue YoY is not a collapse in revenue.
40% drop in share price is a "collapse." Clearly, that is an irrational overreaction in the stock market.
Reports of supply chain issues or production cuts did not correctly predict a slight change in Apple's expected revenue. There was no scoop to make. Also, getting a scoop and attacking other writers are not mutually exclusive.
You are right "Collapse" is not a good word in terms of Revenue and Profits. "Contraction" is better. But the stock price has collapsed as a result. Only time will tell if the Collapse was justified i.e. how long quarters are down YoY. I expect things will be down this year (YoY) like the 6S year. Do revenue/profits pop back up with the new phones in September.
Selectively quoting other people after the fact is easy.
<br.
In fairness, DED, we’ve seen a ~40% drop (from $232 to $142 in price per share) in the market cap of the most successful company in the world, the first one to hit a trillion dollar mark. Nearly $475B is market value has been wiped out.
Surely, some of the hyperventilation is justified?
I find this whole article hilarious because DED did not predict the collapse in revenue before it was disclosed. I think it would be great if AppleInsider hired a writer based in HongKong to Cover China and Asia. Might have provided clues that this was coming. It’s called getting a scoop something that DED has never done because he’s too busy attacking other writers. For what it’s worth I’m predicting Apple shipped 65 million phones for $52 Billion in revenue out of the 84 Billion in revenue stated by Tim Cook. I don’t believe the entire down turn in Phones is due to China - probably two-thirds. But if people aren’t buying phones many are buying watches, AirPods, and HomePods.
Are HomePods a success? On one hand there were a ton of $100 off sales for the HomePod , a product still in its first year. On the other hand most of those people picking up HP probably have Apple Music and this will turn into continuing services revenue. I await the DED article?
Now that’s rich. You think predicting Apples future is as simple as “hiring a writer”?
no. I'm not saying that it would be a job of hiring a writer to predict the Collapse. But China/Asia is now a big important market for Apple and it would be good to have a journalist there to report on trends there both from the consumer/retail side plus from App business in China. China also has most of the manufacturing and Assembly and if Ming-Chi Kou correct that Apple will get into the auto business I expect much of the manufacturing will be in China. This would also make a writer based there very valuable. I think that it is good for AppleInsider to have international writers like William Gallagher and having someone over there would give AI global reach.
It looks like the number of active devices is now 1.4B.
More interesting would be active users.
Is this truly active devices or sold devices as I have half a dozen in active old devices like iPodTouch, iPhone 4S, iPhone5S, SE, and a couple iPads?
That's not to imply their is only 200 Million Active users. I'm sure there are at least 500 Million active users but maybe less than 1 Billion.
Here's some more "oxymorons" I've noticed from the iKnockoff crowd:
"Apple is too expensive" But criticizes Apple for not adding more to the XR. Like how it needs a 1080p screen(for some reason), OLED etc. which would drive the price much higher.
Ostrich and sand??? With the benefit of hindsight, it is now easy to figure out that Apple got it wrong with respect to features and pricing of Xr. Xr is supposed to be the successor to iPhone 8 plus, but it was a side grade (design and SoC upgraded, display and camera downgraded), not a proper upgrade. It still would have been fine if Apple had priced it accordingly. But that didn't happen, hence Apple trying hard with promotional offers to increase sales. And revenue shortage purely due to lack of iphone sales. To even deny these basic facts is to keep the head firmly in the sand like an ostrich.
While I do think that the display was down graded(the display on th 8plus was 401 ppi while the XR display is 326 ppi) and the intel modem is a cheaper alternative to the Qualcomm modems, the Camera in the XR is a significant upgrade with a sensor which is 30% bigger than last years. It’s considered better than the camera in last years IphoneX . I was listening to a John Gruber Talk Show podcast from last year with Nilay Patel and they raved about how much better it was for photos and the Best for Video. I love the colors and If it had the 401 ppi screen would have upgraded to it. Hopefully they will add more colors to the XS and XSMax successors.
He also forgot to mention it has an X design.
You just can't win with these guys.
Reading comprehension issues??? Please go back and read my comment again. I explicitly mentioned "" design and SoC upgraded". What does that mean???
Here's some more "oxymorons" I've noticed from the iKnockoff crowd:
"Apple is too expensive" But criticizes Apple for not adding more to the XR. Like how it needs a 1080p screen(for some reason), OLED etc. which would drive the price much higher.
Ostrich and sand??? With the benefit of hindsight, it is now easy to figure out that Apple got it wrong with respect to features and pricing of Xr. Xr is supposed to be the successor to iPhone 8 plus, but it was a side grade (design and SoC upgraded, display and camera downgraded), not a proper upgrade. It still would have been fine if Apple had priced it accordingly. But that didn't happen, hence Apple trying hard with promotional offers to increase sales. And revenue shortage purely due to lack of iphone sales. To even deny these basic facts is to keep the head firmly in the sand like an ostrich.
"Not a proper upgrade"
So you're asking for more? iPhone XR starting at $899? Better idea?
iPhone XR is the most popular iPhone right now(according to APPLE not the Verge or some fat youtuber). So not sure why you're denying the facts while giving your opinions?
Am I asking for more? Yes. For an additional $150? No, thanks. It should have had those for $750 to begin with. I am sure you will say that "people like me who ask more from Apple have a wrong entitled mindset" and Apple was spot on with features and pricing for Xr. This is where the real problem lie. Apple and its shareholders might have an mindset that Apple is entitled to 38% margin, even in a "matured" smartphone market. But ordinary customers seem to disagree with that entitlement in large numbers.
Disagree with what I say and need proof??? Don't look anywhere beyond last quarter original/revised guidelines, Apple CEO's letter to investors, unusual heavy promotions this year which was NOT seen in previous years.
Philip Elmer-DeWitt today on 4 things he learned from Apple's guidance update:
• Don't trust Apple's guidance. Sure, Steve Jobs used to sandbag investors, guiding low, coming in high. I thought I could take Tim Cook's numbers (or his silence) to the bank. Now I know better.
• Don't be too quick to call FUD. Not all negative reports are created equal. Sometimes there's good reason to have fear, uncertainty and doubt.
• Case in point: Lumentum's revised guidance. When Lumentum's announced in November that a major supplier (almost certainly Apple) had sharply reduced orders for 3D imaging components, I posted several items about analystsreducingestimates. "Could be a bad sign," I wrote. But then I gave more than equal weight to the possibility that Apple had simply switched suppliers.
• Stick to the facts; don't sugar-coat. Apple investors may prefer reading good news about the company, but I'm not doing anyone any favors by putting my thumb on the scale.
I'm not sure what to make of Cook now saying they saw problems in China earlier. Guidance probably should have been flat over last year or even a little lower. But he probably would have caused more havoc in the market then. Apple probably should not give any guidance this quarter just because of the Trade situation. Yeah I know Wall Street will have another fit but it's better than saying results will be less than guidance again in 3 months. I think that this quarter will be very bad in China because they will miss the Chinese new year.
In terms of the upgrade cycle lengthening I have no idea if things will get better YoY in 2019Q4 or 2020Q1. It will probably depend upon how compelling the new Phones are. I know we will have a new A-Series chip in September, but I am most interested in Apple's R&D in MicroLED and Solid State Batteries. Will Apple be able to develop new innovations in these areas and push them to manufacturing. I'm sure Solid State Batteries with (double the life) in the XS and XSMax series would be great. Hope Apple gets there before anyone else like with the 64Bit Chip. Otherwise they will be paying Samsung or LG for them and they will be very expensive. To me this is the most important issue in judging Tim Cook. Has he made the right investments for the future?
Here's some more "oxymorons" I've noticed from the iKnockoff crowd:
"Apple is too expensive" But criticizes Apple for not adding more to the XR. Like how it needs a 1080p screen(for some reason), OLED etc. which would drive the price much higher.
Ostrich and sand??? With the benefit of hindsight, it is now easy to figure out that Apple got it wrong with respect to features and pricing of Xr. Xr is supposed to be the successor to iPhone 8 plus, but it was a side grade (design and SoC upgraded, display and camera downgraded), not a proper upgrade. It still would have been fine if Apple had priced it accordingly. But that didn't happen, hence Apple trying hard with promotional offers to increase sales. And revenue shortage purely due to lack of iphone sales. To even deny these basic facts is to keep the head firmly in the sand like an ostrich.
While I do think that the display was down graded(the display on th 8plus was 401 ppi while the XR display is 326 ppi) and the intel modem is a cheaper alternative to the Qualcomm modems, the Camera in the XR is a significant upgrade with a sensor which is 30% bigger than last years. It’s considered better than the camera in last years IphoneX . I was listening to a John Gruber Talk Show podcast from last year with Nilay Patel and they raved about how much better it was for photos and the Best for Video. I love the colors and If it had the 401 ppi screen would have upgraded to it. Hopefully they will add more colors to the XS and XSMax successors.
He also forgot to mention it has an X design.
You just can't win with these guys.
Reading comprehension issues??? Please go back and read my comment again. I explicitly mentioned "" design and SoC upgraded". What does that mean???
Either way, nothing is free. I would call the bigger, bezel-less, Liquid Retina an upgrade. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that it was a "downgrade".
Also I don't believe Apple made the XR as an iPhone 8 upgrade. More like a reason for android users to switch and an entry into iOS. Same purpose the 5c served.
Here's some more "oxymorons" I've noticed from the iKnockoff crowd:
"Apple is too expensive" But criticizes Apple for not adding more to the XR. Like how it needs a 1080p screen(for some reason), OLED etc. which would drive the price much higher.
Ostrich and sand??? With the benefit of hindsight, it is now easy to figure out that Apple got it wrong with respect to features and pricing of Xr. Xr is supposed to be the successor to iPhone 8 plus, but it was a side grade (design and SoC upgraded, display and camera downgraded), not a proper upgrade. It still would have been fine if Apple had priced it accordingly. But that didn't happen, hence Apple trying hard with promotional offers to increase sales. And revenue shortage purely due to lack of iphone sales. To even deny these basic facts is to keep the head firmly in the sand like an ostrich.
"Not a proper upgrade"
So you're asking for more? iPhone XR starting at $899? Better idea?
iPhone XR is the most popular iPhone right now(according to APPLE not the Verge or some fat youtuber). So not sure why you're denying the facts while giving your opinions?
Am I asking for more? Yes. For an additional $150? No, thanks. It should have had those for $750 to begin with. I am sure you will say that "people like me who ask more from Apple have a wrong entitled mindset" and Apple was spot on with features and pricing for Xr. This is where the real problem lie. Apple and its shareholders might have an mindset that Apple is entitled to 38% margin, even in a "matured" smartphone market. But ordinary customers seem to disagree with that entitlement in large numbers.
Disagree with what I say and need proof??? Don't look anywhere beyond last quarter original/revised guidelines, Apple CEO's letter to investors, unusual heavy promotions this year which was NOT seen in previous years.
iPhone XR outsold the other X models.
So the customers have spoken. If you ran Apple, guidance would have been much worse since you believe Apple should have erased most of their XR profit.
It looks like the number of active devices is now 1.4B.
More interesting would be active users.
Is this truly active devices or sold devices as I have half a dozen in active old devices like iPodTouch, iPhone 4S, iPhone5S, SE, and a couple iPads?
That's not to imply their is only 200 Million Active users. I'm sure there are at least 500 Million active users but maybe less than 1 Billion.
In general active users and active devices does mean devices being still used. I’m not sure on Apple’s criteria but on a website it’s generally one login per month for an active user. If you keep the iPhone in a drawer it isn’t counted. Active users are of course fewer than active devices for the reasons you mentioned. I doubt , however, if on average iPhone users have another active device - ie that the average number of active devices per user is 2 or more. It might be for people on this site. So 1.4B devices is I suspect 700-1B users.
Here's some more "oxymorons" I've noticed from the iKnockoff crowd:
"Apple is too expensive" But criticizes Apple for not adding more to the XR. Like how it needs a 1080p screen(for some reason), OLED etc. which would drive the price much higher.
Ostrich and sand??? With the benefit of hindsight, it is now easy to figure out that Apple got it wrong with respect to features and pricing of Xr. Xr is supposed to be the successor to iPhone 8 plus, but it was a side grade (design and SoC upgraded, display and camera downgraded), not a proper upgrade. It still would have been fine if Apple had priced it accordingly. But that didn't happen, hence Apple trying hard with promotional offers to increase sales. And revenue shortage purely due to lack of iphone sales. To even deny these basic facts is to keep the head firmly in the sand like an ostrich.
While I do think that the display was down graded(the display on th 8plus was 401 ppi while the XR display is 326 ppi) and the intel modem is a cheaper alternative to the Qualcomm modems, the Camera in the XR is a significant upgrade with a sensor which is 30% bigger than last years. It’s considered better than the camera in last years IphoneX . I was listening to a John Gruber Talk Show podcast from last year with Nilay Patel and they raved about how much better it was for photos and the Best for Video. I love the colors and If it had the 401 ppi screen would have upgraded to it. Hopefully they will add more colors to the XS and XSMax successors.
He also forgot to mention it has an X design.
You just can't win with these guys.
He did say the design was upgraded. That includes the redesign for the FaceID Array/notch plus the colors. I personally am very impressed by the colors. Hope they keep them because long term I think it will help bring in switchers from Android.
Philip Elmer-DeWitt today on 4 things he learned from Apple's guidance update:
• Don't trust Apple's guidance. Sure, Steve Jobs used to sandbag investors, guiding low, coming in high. I thought I could take Tim Cook's numbers (or his silence) to the bank. Now I know better.
• Don't be too quick to call FUD. Not all negative reports are created equal. Sometimes there's good reason to have fear, uncertainty and doubt.
• Case in point: Lumentum's revised guidance. When Lumentum's announced in November that a major supplier (almost certainly Apple) had sharply reduced orders for 3D imaging components, I posted several items about analystsreducingestimates. "Could be a bad sign," I wrote. But then I gave more than equal weight to the possibility that Apple had simply switched suppliers.
• Stick to the facts; don't sugar-coat. Apple investors may prefer reading good news about the company, but I'm not doing anyone any favors by putting my thumb on the scale.
Apple has never missed guidance in the previous 24 quarters. Except for the few times they earned MORE than their guidance. That’s 6 years, and is as far back as I bothered to go. So one quarter in the midst of a “trade war” is enough to throw out all that history of being correct? Give me a break.
Too quick to call FUD? Sorry, but when literally hundreds of reports (that’s 24 quarters times multiple reports each time) are wrong you think people should stop calling BS on negative rumors (reports)?
Lumentum clearly stated “a large industrial/commercial customer”. Not multiple customers, just one. I didn’t know Apple was considered an “industrial” customer. Since Lumentum is a key supplier to telecommunications companies, it’s doubtful they were even talking about Apple. Further, Apple buys their components ahead of manufacture, which is why suppliers usually have lower component orders in the Oct-Dec quarter because Apple is ordering for the Jan-Mar quarter. This has happened numerous times in the past where suppliers reported lower sales for the Oct-Dec quarter only to have Apple set record sales numbers.
Edited: Forgot to mention. Apple suppliers have also reported record quarters in the months leading up to an iPhone launch. Further proof that component orders are often placed months in advance of when they're used.
Stick to the facts? That’s hilarious coming from a group of people who don’t really report facts, but mostly reports rumors as facts.
It looks like the number of active devices is now 1.4B.
More interesting would be active users.
Is this truly active devices or sold devices as I have half a dozen in active old devices like iPodTouch, iPhone 4S, iPhone5S, SE, and a couple iPads?
That's not to imply their is only 200 Million Active users. I'm sure there are at least 500 Million active users but maybe less than 1 Billion.
In general active users and active devices does mean devices being still used. I’m not sure on Apple’s criteria but on a website it’s generally one login per month for an active user. If you keep the iPhone in a drawer it isn’t counted. Active users are of course fewer than active devices for the reasons you mentioned. I doubt , however, if on average iPhone users have another active device - ie that the average number of active devices per user is 2 or more. It might be for people on this site. So 1.4B devices is I suspect 700-1B users.
Apples criteria is when a device visits The App Store. There's a very specific reason for this and it has to do with Google.
Google USED to count a device that was turned on and "checked in to their servers" which is a fancy way of saying login. Unfortunately this tracked ALL Android devices including the really cheap/old devices running older versions of Android. This had the effect of showing a disproportionate number of users on older devices and made their Android Version pie chart look really bad (yes, even worse than now).
So Google changed their method to only show visits to the Google Play Store. Their reasoning (which does make sense) was that developers would be more interested in knowing the number of devices where people are actively looking at getting Apps (the more valuable customers). But this had an added side benefit. Literally overnight Android distribution numbers changed and the number of people using older versions dropped while newer versions went up. Did a large number of users stop using their old device and upgrade to new ones? Nope. The distribution of users never changed, just how Google counted them.
Apple never used to report users vs iOS version until much later than Google. And when they did they used the SAME method as Google - visits to The App Store.
The young guys who do videos/youtube for AppleInsider are very good. I wish Victor would have them on the podcast, but I think Nilay Patel did the best Review of the iPhoneX that I have watched. I find Nilay's comments fair and balanced concerning Apple even if a lot of readers here don't. Dieter Bohn on the other hand may do good work but definitely has a very unbiased balance towards Android. I think he still has a little bitterness to iOS and the iPhone because it killed WebOS.
Comments
He also forgot to mention it has an X design.
You just can't win with these guys.
• Don't trust Apple's guidance. Sure, Steve Jobs used to sandbag investors, guiding low, coming in high. I thought I could take Tim Cook's numbers (or his silence) to the bank. Now I know better.
• Don't be too quick to call FUD. Not all negative reports are created equal. Sometimes there's good reason to have fear, uncertainty and doubt.
• Case in point: Lumentum's revised guidance. When Lumentum's announced in November that a major supplier (almost certainly Apple) had sharply reduced orders for 3D imaging components, I posted several items about analysts reducing estimates. "Could be a bad sign," I wrote. But then I gave more than equal weight to the possibility that Apple had simply switched suppliers.
• Stick to the facts; don't sugar-coat. Apple investors may prefer reading good news about the company, but I'm not doing anyone any favors by putting my thumb on the scale.
https://www.ped30.com/2019/01/06/apple-warning-lessons-learned/
Yes, the media likes to make Apple their whipping boy, but anyone who has been an Apple supporter since the 90’s and earlier knows this.
The upside to all of this is that Apple does perform better under pressure when making consumer products.
Time to innovate some numbers Phil.
You are right "Collapse" is not a good word in terms of Revenue and Profits. "Contraction" is better. But the stock price has collapsed as a result. Only time will tell if the Collapse was justified i.e. how long quarters are down YoY. I expect things will be down this year (YoY) like the 6S year. Do revenue/profits pop back up with the new phones in September.
Selectively quoting other people after the fact is easy. <br.
no. I'm not saying that it would be a job of hiring a writer to predict the Collapse. But China/Asia is now a big important market for Apple and it would be good to have a journalist there to report on trends there both from the consumer/retail side plus from App business in China. China also has most of the manufacturing and Assembly and if Ming-Chi Kou correct that Apple will get into the auto business I expect much of the manufacturing will be in China. This would also make a writer based there very valuable. I think that it is good for AppleInsider to have international writers like William Gallagher and having someone over there would give AI global reach.
Disagree with what I say and need proof??? Don't look anywhere beyond last quarter original/revised guidelines, Apple CEO's letter to investors, unusual heavy promotions this year which was NOT seen in previous years.
In terms of the upgrade cycle lengthening I have no idea if things will get better YoY in 2019Q4 or 2020Q1. It will probably depend upon how compelling the new Phones are. I know we will have a new A-Series chip in September, but I am most interested in Apple's R&D in MicroLED and Solid State Batteries. Will Apple be able to develop new innovations in these areas and push them to manufacturing. I'm sure Solid State Batteries with (double the life) in the XS and XSMax series would be great. Hope Apple gets there before anyone else like with the 64Bit Chip. Otherwise they will be paying Samsung or LG for them and they will be very expensive. To me this is the most important issue in judging Tim Cook. Has he made the right investments for the future?
Also I don't believe Apple made the XR as an iPhone 8 upgrade. More like a reason for android users to switch and an entry into iOS. Same purpose the 5c served.
iPhone XR outsold the other X models.
So the customers have spoken. If you ran Apple, guidance would have been much worse since you believe Apple should have erased most of their XR profit.
"iPhone 5c is a failure" deja vu?
More BS.
Apple has never missed guidance in the previous 24 quarters. Except for the few times they earned MORE than their guidance. That’s 6 years, and is as far back as I bothered to go. So one quarter in the midst of a “trade war” is enough to throw out all that history of being correct? Give me a break.
Too quick to call FUD? Sorry, but when literally hundreds of reports (that’s 24 quarters times multiple reports each time) are wrong you think people should stop calling BS on negative rumors (reports)?
Lumentum clearly stated “a large industrial/commercial customer”. Not multiple customers, just one. I didn’t know Apple was considered an “industrial” customer. Since Lumentum is a key supplier to telecommunications companies, it’s doubtful they were even talking about Apple. Further, Apple buys their components ahead of manufacture, which is why suppliers usually have lower component orders in the Oct-Dec quarter because Apple is ordering for the Jan-Mar quarter. This has happened numerous times in the past where suppliers reported lower sales for the Oct-Dec quarter only to have Apple set record sales numbers.
Edited: Forgot to mention. Apple suppliers have also reported record quarters in the months leading up to an iPhone launch. Further proof that component orders are often placed months in advance of when they're used.
Stick to the facts? That’s hilarious coming from a group of people who don’t really report facts, but mostly reports rumors as facts.
Apples criteria is when a device visits The App Store. There's a very specific reason for this and it has to do with Google.
Google USED to count a device that was turned on and "checked in to their servers" which is a fancy way of saying login. Unfortunately this tracked ALL Android devices including the really cheap/old devices running older versions of Android. This had the effect of showing a disproportionate number of users on older devices and made their Android Version pie chart look really bad (yes, even worse than now).
So Google changed their method to only show visits to the Google Play Store. Their reasoning (which does make sense) was that developers would be more interested in knowing the number of devices where people are actively looking at getting Apps (the more valuable customers). But this had an added side benefit. Literally overnight Android distribution numbers changed and the number of people using older versions dropped while newer versions went up. Did a large number of users stop using their old device and upgrade to new ones? Nope. The distribution of users never changed, just how Google counted them.
Apple never used to report users vs iOS version until much later than Google. And when they did they used the SAME method as Google - visits to The App Store.
Looks like another new one-post troll at Appleinsider. Where have I seen that before?