Editorial: No, Apple isn't in a post-iPhone era, and won't be anytime soon

Posted:
in General Discussion edited August 1
You can prove anything with statistics, and sometimes it's obvious why you'd try. After Apple made it's usual everything-is-great financial call this week, talking heads are dramatically pointing out that for the first time in seven years, the iPhone accounted for less than 50% of Apple's revenue.




Yes, the iPhone is less than 50% of Apple's revenue when examined on a quarterly basis. And so is the fact that Apple is now applying its repeated "couldn't be happier" line to just about everything else it does but the iPhone.

However, pundits who can quite correctly count that under 50% figure, and ones who look back to check their 2012 notes, have then been taking a leap into unsupportable nonsense. It's the Apple pundit syllogism -- they need to report bad news for Apple, this is some news about Apple, therefore it must be bad news.

We see this all the time, most recently in parades of articles about how ghastly the 'iPhone 11' design is, even though all indications are that it will look pretty much the same as last year's models.

Apple did sell 13% fewer iPhones this year than last. And it wasn't a fluke, it is part of a trend that's been going on for some years.

Go figure

That 13% fewer dollars generated in iPhone sales is clear. Apple sold this many iPhones before, it's sold this many now, there's no quibbling. It's the use of the 50% figure as some sort of crisis flag that is insane.

Yes, this quarter, and this quarter alone, the iPhone represents less than half of Apple's revenues, and the last time it was under 50% was in 2012. Only, we know that Apple made $26 billion in iPhone sales this past quarter. In 2012, it made something in the order of $33 billion for the same period. This is less, Apple is doomed, QED.

In between that 2012 Q3 and this 2019 one, though, Apple brought out the iPhone 6 Plus. It's brought out many iPhones, and pundits comparing this 2019 quarter to that one 2012 quarter choose to omit important details.

If you use the figures across all of the years and you ultimately see the decline, but you also see how at times Apple has earned over $60 billion from iPhones in a quarter. And then there's that quarterly figure. It is being compared in a vacuum, without context.

For the quarter, Apple's iPhone sales are less than 50% of revenue. It is also historically the slowest quarter for iPhone sales, and has been so for the last decade because of September release cycles. Historical context is also something being lost in the noise.

Compared annually to account for the ebb and flow of iPhone demand, it absolutely isn't the case that less than 50% of Apple's revenue is from the iPhone. Instead, for the last four quarters, it's about 56.5%.

Crying all the way to the bank. Left: Apple CFO Luca Maestri, Right: CEO Tim Cook
Crying all the way to the bank. Left: Apple CFO Luca Maestri, Right: CEO Tim Cook


Next quarter, when the "iPhone 11" comes out, the iPhone won't encompass less than 50% of Apple's revenue. And the quarter after that, it positively won't be.

You would think that being able to say Apple used to make $60 billion and now it's only making $26 billion might be a story, but details complicate things and details almost never help the pundit syllogism.

Not when if you quote a detail like one actual sales figure, you are surely beholden to quote others. And when you do that, the story is that Apple is making an incredible amount of money -- just not all of it from one product. Any business journalist, any sane human being, would have to think that's sensible of Apple, but we're not talking about sense and there is a hope that we aren't thinking either.

We're in a world where bad news for Apple makes people click to read more, and we're in a world where therefore it's only the headline that matters. Which means that we can have headlines like "Disaster for Apple as iPhone Sales Drop Below 50%" or "Apple reports declining profits and stagnant growth, again."

Figure it out

We're not in a post-iPhone era, and we're not going to be in one any time soon. We're not in a crisis scenario where Apple must now scramble to find a way to replace its iPhone revenue stream, when Apple has been doing precisely that and like every other thing it has migrated to across the years, it set the table well before.

It knew the iPod was starting to collapse, so it launched the iPod touch and iPhone, so it could launch the App Store. The App Store paved the way to Apple's services. And, there have been earlier and later examples.

Apple has been diversifying for 20 years -- as every business ultimately needs to -- lest it become too reliant on one product. Apple has been doing that since before analysts noticed any sales drop, and it has been doing so since it founded itself over four decades ago.

The real story in this week's earnings call is that Apple has been doing this very, very successfully under Tim Cook's leadership for about the last decade.

Somehow, calls that Apple is doomed have continued to echo for decades. Calls still come that Tim Cook needs to go over some perceived slight to a user, generally accompanied with the similarly nonsensical "this never would have happened if Steve Jobs was alive."

Cook is where he needs to be, and Apple still isn't doomed. It hasn't been for 20 years -- but when somebody renews the clarion call, it will generate the clicks.



Keep up with AppleInsider by downloading the AppleInsider app for iOS, and follow us on YouTube, Twitter @appleinsider and Facebook for live, late-breaking coverage. You can also check out our official Instagram account for exclusive photos.
AppleExposedlolliver

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,480member
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    AppleExposedhmlongcololliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 20
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,007member
    There will be equilibrium when most have mobile phones, iPhones but than there is regular upgrade/replacement by users so iPhone is monkey stuck to your back and only go away when you die..Moreover, population on earth still increasing than phone will always be there. There is no such thing as post iPhone era.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 20
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,191member
    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    seanismorris
  • Reply 4 of 20
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,552member
    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.
    dewmelolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 20
    FolioFolio Posts: 634member
    So yes, the refresh rate on iphones is stretching with maturation. Unlike eight years ago, people are also refreshing Apple watches, airpods, ipads, etc. and getting further enmeshed in ecosystem (maybe even more strongly tied than many who vow to a partner "for better, or worse"). What's also good: as smartphones in general become trashed less often, the assured longevity of Iphone means rising attraction to more Android boys and girls.
    lolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 20
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,193member
    When Apple dropped 'computer' from the name the logic was 'we are not only a computer company'.

    Post iPhone (whether we are there already or approaching that point) only means that the dependency on iPhone as the biggest revenue driver has passed. Not unlike when they dropped computer from the name and became a 'phone' company.

    There is no connection to the company being doomed.

    One of the takeaways from the call was that tethering services to iPhone wasn't a goal unto itself.

    The Mac, as much as I dislike the direction of the last few years, is driving far more revenues now, as a bit player within the company (when compared to the phone business) than ever before. If they were to spin the company off it would be a mega corporation.

    iPhone will probably end up in a similar situation at some point (unless there are major changes in the phone business model) and non-iPhone tethered services might become the bread and butter earner.

    Then there are the big unknowns, like cars etc and areas that might seem unthinkable now, like Apple licencing its hardware to third parties. 


    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 7 of 20
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,656member
    Apple is the only company we all hear about being a one trick pony. Except for companies like GE which was originally made up of various market segment business units most company in the market have the exact same issue of being dependent on one market segment. However, if you look at all the big conglomerate like GE where are they today, they all not doing well. Companies with a single focus appear to be doing much better. 

    All the people saying it is bad to be single focus and companies need to diversify also know companies like GE are hurting because they are diversify. All the same people say Apple should buy up other big companies also know company who go on big shopping sprees are also not doing well. 
  • Reply 8 of 20
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,941member
    avon b7 said:
    When Apple dropped 'computer' from the name the logic was 'we are not only a computer company'.

    Post iPhone (whether we are there already or approaching that point) only means that the dependency on iPhone as the biggest revenue driver has passed. Not unlike when they dropped computer from the name and became a 'phone' company.

    There is no connection to the company being doomed.

    One of the takeaways from the call was that tethering services to iPhone wasn't a goal unto itself.

    The Mac, as much as I dislike the direction of the last few years, is driving far more revenues now, as a bit player within the company (when compared to the phone business) than ever before. If they were to spin the company off it would be a mega corporation.

    iPhone will probably end up in a similar situation at some point (unless there are major changes in the phone business model) and non-iPhone tethered services might become the bread and butter earner.

    Then there are the big unknowns, like cars etc and areas that might seem unthinkable now, like Apple licencing its hardware to third parties. 


    And yet, for all that, Apple's iPhone user base keeps growing, even in China, and is expected to pass 1 billion users WW by no later than Q1 2020, countering the marketshare meme of a few posters here, including yourself.



    edited August 1 AppleExposedlolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 20
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,503unconfirmed, member
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 20
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,906member
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.
    edited August 1 lollivermuthuk_vanalingamSanctum1972watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 20
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,503unconfirmed, member
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.

    NO, NO, NO.

    Why would Apple charge their users for a service that was free?

    I'm saying iMessage+Facetime could be a paid service on android. Some people (anecdotal) have already said they would pay to have those exclusive apps on their crappy android. You're paying for the best services and security/privacy. WhatsApp users don't have a secure alternative. Most android users outside of the US have dumped SMS anyways so they're not hard to persuade as WhatsApp/Viber proves.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 20
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,906member
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.

    NO, NO, NO.

    Why would Apple charge their users for a service that was free?
    Because the only Apple service we saw on Android is a paid one: Apple Music. Your suggestion may create deep-spaghetti legal issues stemming from anti-trust law.
    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 20
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,503unconfirmed, member
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.

    NO, NO, NO.

    Why would Apple charge their users for a service that was free?
    Because the only Apple service we saw on Android is a paid one: Apple Music. Your suggestion may create deep-spaghetti legal issues stemming from anti-trust law.

    I've thought of that but Facetime especially costs Apple a lot of money to operate and Apple operates these services without data mining and ads.

    Worst that can happen is Apple pull the App from android.





    It's possible but the government may claim it's unfair that Apple charges for competing knockoffs to pay for their hard work. Then again, no one forces you to pay when you have free apps like WhatsApp.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 20
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,193member
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.

    NO, NO, NO.

    Why would Apple charge their users for a service that was free?
    Because the only Apple service we saw on Android is a paid one: Apple Music. Your suggestion may create deep-spaghetti legal issues stemming from anti-trust law.

    I've thought of that but Facetime especially costs Apple a lot of money to operate and Apple operates these services without data mining and ads.

    Worst that can happen is Apple pull the App from android.





    It's possible but the government may claim it's unfair that Apple charges for competing knockoffs to pay for their hard work. Then again, no one forces you to pay when you have free apps like WhatsApp.
    You won't find anyone itching for Messages on Android. WhatsApp is Messages for Android. In fact, for many iOS users it is also the default instant messaging app. I do not know any iOS users that even use it, even occasionally. My wife only uses WhatsApp on her iPhone XR.

    And after WhatsApp comes Telegram.
    muthuk_vanalingamphilboogie
  • Reply 15 of 20
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,138member
    Never looked forward to September more than this year....Just so we can finally stop people writting "iPhone 11" like it's going to be a thing. 
    lolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 20
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,941member
    avon b7 said:
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.

    NO, NO, NO.

    Why would Apple charge their users for a service that was free?
    Because the only Apple service we saw on Android is a paid one: Apple Music. Your suggestion may create deep-spaghetti legal issues stemming from anti-trust law.

    I've thought of that but Facetime especially costs Apple a lot of money to operate and Apple operates these services without data mining and ads.

    Worst that can happen is Apple pull the App from android.





    It's possible but the government may claim it's unfair that Apple charges for competing knockoffs to pay for their hard work. Then again, no one forces you to pay when you have free apps like WhatsApp.
    You won't find anyone itching for Messages on Android. WhatsApp is Messages for Android. In fact, for many iOS users it is also the default instant messaging app. I do not know any iOS users that even use it, even occasionally. My wife only uses WhatsApp on her iPhone XR.

    And after WhatsApp comes Telegram.
    Well, for starters, millions of teenage girls in the U.S. certainly would be keen for Messages on Android, so, your anecdotal evidence isn't universal, making your statement "you won't find anyone itching for Messages on Android" absolutely false, and quite typical of you.
    edited August 2 watto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 20
    avon b7 said:
    Post iPhone (whether we are there already or approaching that point) only means that the dependency on iPhone as the biggest revenue driver has passed. Not unlike when they dropped computer from the name and became a 'phone' company.

    I'd like to note that iPhone is still the biggest revenue driver at Apple. It's just no longer bigger than all the other parts of Apple's business combined - for this just-reported quarter, anyway. There are multiple factors affecting the percentage mix, but I'd say that overall the company looks incredibly healthy.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 20
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,906member
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.

    NO, NO, NO.

    Why would Apple charge their users for a service that was free?
    Because the only Apple service we saw on Android is a paid one: Apple Music. Your suggestion may create deep-spaghetti legal issues stemming from anti-trust law.

    I've thought of that but Facetime especially costs Apple a lot of money to operate and Apple operates these services without data mining and ads.

    Worst that can happen is Apple pull the App from android.

    ...

    It's possible but the government may claim it's unfair that Apple charges for competing knockoffs to pay for their hard work. Then again, no one forces you to pay when you have free apps like WhatsApp.
    Facetime is a system level feature on iOS: every iOS user can Facetime another iOS user. Why would Apple enhance Android by making Facetime a system level feature on Android, that’s stupid !

    If an Android user cannot use paid Facetime to call another Android user nobody will buy it. The same goes for iMessage. Besides, you’re not relevant to anyone such that they will pay extra to chat with dear you, here is SMS, take it or leave it.
    edited August 2 philboogiewatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 20
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,193member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    iPhone is a massive success.
    Analysts: Apple is a one-trick pony! They need other products with great revenue stream!

    Other products and service are growing massively up to 50%.
    Analysts: Apple is doomed!

    If we were really in a post-iPhone era Apple would not be releasing new services for iPhone.

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 

    zoetmb said:
    The iPhone being less than 50% of Apple's business isn't a bad thing, it's a positive.   Too much dependency on a single product line is a bad business strategy.   Apple's income being more diverse is a strong positive and the fact that it's more split between hardware and services is even greater positive as it protects Apple against downturns in the economy and if any strong competitors appear.   

    How many articles were there in recent years stating that Apple was no longer a computer company, but an "iPhone" company.   That was a weakness, not a strength.  

    I'm certainly no genius, but even I can see that a more diverse Apple business is better for Apple and for Apple's customers.  Mac revenue is up 5% year over year, and that's is a great thing, because Mac was becoming such a small part of Apple, I had concerns over how much attention Apple would give it going forward.  iPad is up 15.5%, Services are up 15.9% and Wearables/Home Accessories is up an outstanding 36.5%.   Considering the world economy is not in great shape and that Chinese consumers seem to be spending less across the board, I think Apple is doing great in spite of the fact that they won't beat last fiscal's record revenue and earnings.   Not every year can be a record year. 

    And while iPhone revenue was less than 50% in Q3, it's still 61.7% fiscal year-to-date, so this is much ado about nothing. 
    Still Apple’s services and accessories mostly depend on owning other Apple hardware. For me the tell of Apple becoming a completely different company is if they ever make iMessage cross platform. 
    Why, what sort of revenue would a free chat app on Android create? How is that more healthy for their earnings? 

    Nah. Of course Apple profit is dependent on selling Apple products. That's the whole point. Services are nice but what you're saying is Apple should back away from its immensely successful model of selling premium hardware and become a services-oriented company. Why? That's one viable model, but why on earth would they want to stop doing what they do best? Services augment their already healthy business. It doesn't replace it.

    iMessage and Facetime for Android is a GREAT idea if, Apple charges a monthly fee. Which may or may not be what Rogifan suggested.

    Almost everyone agrees iMessage is the superior texting app. At $1.99 for both Facetime and iMessage Apple could monetize users of stolen IP while allowing Apple users to have access. This not only makes Apple products even more attractive but like I said allows Apple to monetize knockoffs. I can EASILY see iMessage/Facetime on android surpassing WhatsApp and Skype or whatever crap they use.

    They're "cool" you get to finally be a blue bubble and get secure Facetime with group calling with all your Apple friends for just 1.99 a month.
    So you suggest Apple makes Facetime and iMessage a paid service for macOS and iOS users in order to expand to Android. Even if not, your Android friends will not pay 1.99/month to chat with you dear Apple friend. They already pay for SMS to telcos, since there will be two subscriptions iMessage must be split in two separate apps for SMS and iCloud (iMessage). Since this is not possible iMessage will include only iCloud messages, not SMS and as such it will not be as functional as on iOS. A paid iMessage app on Android has no chance to survive among free apps like Viber, WhatsApp, Messenger and a multitude of others.

    NO, NO, NO.

    Why would Apple charge their users for a service that was free?
    Because the only Apple service we saw on Android is a paid one: Apple Music. Your suggestion may create deep-spaghetti legal issues stemming from anti-trust law.

    I've thought of that but Facetime especially costs Apple a lot of money to operate and Apple operates these services without data mining and ads.

    Worst that can happen is Apple pull the App from android.





    It's possible but the government may claim it's unfair that Apple charges for competing knockoffs to pay for their hard work. Then again, no one forces you to pay when you have free apps like WhatsApp.
    You won't find anyone itching for Messages on Android. WhatsApp is Messages for Android. In fact, for many iOS users it is also the default instant messaging app. I do not know any iOS users that even use it, even occasionally. My wife only uses WhatsApp on her iPhone XR.

    And after WhatsApp comes Telegram.
    Well, for starters, millions of teenage girls in the U.S. certainly would be keen for Messages on Android, so, your anecdotal evidence isn't universal, making your statement "you won't find anyone itching for Messages on Android" absolutely false, and quite typical of you.
    That doesn't change anything. Android users even in the U.S use instant messaging. The only way they can communicate in that way with iOS users is via a cross platform solution so it is iOS users, not Android users who need to adapt in those cases and use a different app. Android users are oblivious to any of that. For them it's one app fits all. No reason at all to change - not even if Messages were ported to Android. If would simply represent an alternative. Like Telegram already is on Android.
    muthuk_vanalingamphilboogie
  • Reply 20 of 20
    Absolutely true but being, in effect, a one product company is exactly what has been wrong with Apple since Tim took control of the company.
Sign In or Register to comment.