Any word on VR? Oculus Quest 2 being released the 13th. Odd date to pick.
If, as you say, Oculus Quest 2 is being released on the 13th that means the announcement of its release date was already made. So there's no conflict on respective product announcements. Apple's delivery dates tend to be a week or two AFTER their announcements, so once again, that's not a conflict on delivery. And lastly, there's not likely to be an announcement on Apple Glass, so once again there's no conflict.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
Here’s hoping for surprise of ultrasonic under screen Touch ID. Probably not likely this year but PLEASE Apple get it for next year’s iPhones. I may hold onto my iPhone 8 Plus if it’s not coming this year but will gladly trade it in for new Touch ID when it does.
The word "Hi" (in the invitation's slogan: "Hi, Speed") in my opinion probably alludes to the upcoming U1 chip's ability to find things in the Find My app. Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. And the new internal chips combined with a new external design language is the only time a new brand name can be appropriate. Also, the balloon images in the invitation also refer to the Find My app's balloons. In fact the innermost balloon in the invitation with the Apple logo actually looks like an AirTag! (Sorry Japhey, I just noticed that you commented on this before me.)
Another guess of mine is that the backside of an AirTag has a recess so you can loop a string through it to tie it to something.
Its all good. And hey, we both beat Prosser to the punch.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
The Mini and SE are only superficially competitors. It's likely that the Mini will be refreshed each year with the latest A Series SOC, while the SE may not be refreshed for two or more years, targeting different markets and price points.
Given that there are 900 million plus iPhone users worldwide, a family of four annual models of similar BOM, is not "a bad idea" for annual sales of 180 to 200 million iPhones in a mature market.
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Steve streamlined the product matrix through necessity. Apple wasn't being competitive with the products it had, pricing and manufacturing capacity.
Today, in the handset world, Apple definitely cannot compete by remaining in the premium price band with just two models.
The current situation (with more models) is a direct result of not being able to increase sales over four years. Change began in 2017 and is continuing, but again, through necessity.
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Steve streamlined the product matrix through necessity. Apple wasn't being competitive with the products it had, pricing and manufacturing capacity.
Today, in the handset world, Apple definitely cannot compete by remaining in the premium price band with just two models.
The current situation (with more models) is a direct result of not being able to increase sales over four years. Change began in 2017 and is continuing, but again, through necessity.
I seldom agree with your analysis of Apple's marketing, as your bias towards another device maker is well known, and I don't with your take today. and for the record, there are three "premium" models today; two iPhone 11 Pro models, and the iPhone 11.
Apple actually took a fairly natural and evolutionary growth path to a wider, but still small set, of models over some 13 years of the iPhone. I would argue that the increase in models has more to do with Apple's Cupertino Headquarters completion, and increasing head count, than "market necessity" of increasing the models. Over those 13 years, Apple still maintains its leadership of revenues, margins, ASP's, and profits, over all of its competitors. I actually expect that Apple will launch a "super flagship" in a few years that will incorporate a higher level of leading/bleeding edge features and technology, but in a product initially designed to a much more constrained supply chain, due to the complexity of the technology, and maybe only a few million units a year, which would still be unlikely to meet demand in Apple's iPhone market.
I could make a compelling argument that your favorite device builder has way too many models, with little differentiation, which is a common theme in the Android OS device market, all driven by "necessity". Perhaps, it isn't too late for Huawei/Honor to focus on fewer models, and better marketing, but that is pointless, as Huawei doesn't compete much at all with Apple, and still has a ways to go to even compete well against Samsung, its main competitor.
For the record, I doubt that Apple will be able to increase sales beyond 200-220 million plus units in any given year, as the useful life cycle of the iPhone is so long, with the market bolstered by very valuable used iPhones. Still, you may be correct that Apple's desire to increase sales, and offset some ASP and margin loss against growth in services, will actually lead to unit sales growth for iPhone. That doesn't scream "necessity" as much as evolution in iPhone marketing in a mature market.
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Let’s try this again, but I’ll write slower this time.
“Apple Watch” is a watch, made by Apple. “Apple TV” is a TV device... made by Apple.
If you start calling the computer made by Apple the, uh, Apple, then you have the “Apple Apple.”
Awkward.
But that’s ok, because everyone would still call it a Mac.
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Steve streamlined the product matrix through necessity. Apple wasn't being competitive with the products it had, pricing and manufacturing capacity.
Today, in the handset world, Apple definitely cannot compete by remaining in the premium price band with just two models.
The current situation (with more models) is a direct result of not being able to increase sales over four years. Change began in 2017 and is continuing, but again, through necessity.
I seldom agree with your analysis of Apple's marketing, as your bias towards another device maker is well known, and I don't with your take today. and for the record, there are three "premium" models today; two iPhone 11 Pro models, and the iPhone 11.
Apple actually took a fairly natural and evolutionary growth path to a wider, but still small set, of models over some 13 years of the iPhone. I would argue that the increase in models has more to do with Apple's Cupertino Headquarters completion, and increasing head count, than "market necessity" of increasing the models. Over those 13 years, Apple still maintains its leadership of revenues, margins, ASP's, and profits, over all of its competitors. I actually expect that Apple will launch a "super flagship" in a few years that will incorporate a higher level of leading/bleeding edge features and technology, but in a product initially designed to a much more constrained supply chain, due to the complexity of the technology, and maybe only a few million units a year, which would still be unlikely to meet demand in Apple's iPhone market.
I could make a compelling argument that your favorite device builder has way too many models, with little differentiation, which is a common theme in the Android OS device market, all driven by "necessity". Perhaps, it isn't too late for Huawei/Honor to focus on fewer models, and better marketing, but that is pointless, as Huawei doesn't compete much at all with Apple, and still has a ways to go to even compete well against Samsung, its main competitor.
For the record, I doubt that Apple will be able to increase sales beyond 200-220 million plus units in any given year, as the useful life cycle of the iPhone is so long, with the market bolstered by very valuable used iPhones. Still, you may be correct that Apple's desire to increase sales, and offset some ASP and margin loss against growth in services, will actually lead to unit sales growth for iPhone. That doesn't scream "necessity" as much as evolution in iPhone marketing in a mature market.
Interesting. I just wish Apple offered one ultimate iOS device: the iPhone and a compact model: the iPhone SE. No mini, maxi, or pro. No selling older phones such as the XR. One Watch: the current one. Two iPads: the Pro and the iPad. And so on.
The very notion of such differentiation is alien to the concept of the original iPhone. It clearly originated elsewhere.
P.S. I only care about the best - not the latest - hardware running the best software. Fragmentation never bids well for quality in the long run. There’s also not a single (valid) excuse for Apple to price any iPhone above the original model which was, by all means, a much more challenging product to manufacture at the time. Today’s industry is all about milking the market for what it’s worth, which is a rather dangerous approach in an increasingly unstable world. Offering ‘entry-level’ kit priced similarly to the ‘flagships’ of recent past is hardly enough to disguise the ever-growing margins.
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Steve streamlined the product matrix through necessity. Apple wasn't being competitive with the products it had, pricing and manufacturing capacity.
Today, in the handset world, Apple definitely cannot compete by remaining in the premium price band with just two models.
The current situation (with more models) is a direct result of not being able to increase sales over four years. Change began in 2017 and is continuing, but again, through necessity.
I seldom agree with your analysis of Apple's marketing, as your bias towards another device maker is well known, and I don't with your take today. and for the record, there are three "premium" models today; two iPhone 11 Pro models, and the iPhone 11.
Apple actually took a fairly natural and evolutionary growth path to a wider, but still small set, of models over some 13 years of the iPhone. I would argue that the increase in models has more to do with Apple's Cupertino Headquarters completion, and increasing head count, than "market necessity" of increasing the models. Over those 13 years, Apple still maintains its leadership of revenues, margins, ASP's, and profits, over all of its competitors. I actually expect that Apple will launch a "super flagship" in a few years that will incorporate a higher level of leading/bleeding edge features and technology, but in a product initially designed to a much more constrained supply chain, due to the complexity of the technology, and maybe only a few million units a year, which would still be unlikely to meet demand in Apple's iPhone market.
I could make a compelling argument that your favorite device builder has way too many models, with little differentiation, which is a common theme in the Android OS device market, all driven by "necessity". Perhaps, it isn't too late for Huawei/Honor to focus on fewer models, and better marketing, but that is pointless, as Huawei doesn't compete much at all with Apple, and still has a ways to go to even compete well against Samsung, its main competitor.
For the record, I doubt that Apple will be able to increase sales beyond 200-220 million plus units in any given year, as the useful life cycle of the iPhone is so long, with the market bolstered by very valuable used iPhones. Still, you may be correct that Apple's desire to increase sales, and offset some ASP and margin loss against growth in services, will actually lead to unit sales growth for iPhone. That doesn't scream "necessity" as much as evolution in iPhone marketing in a mature market.
Interesting. I just wish Apple offered one ultimate iOS device: the iPhone, and a compact model: the iPhone SE. No mini, maxi, or pro. No selling older phones such as the XR. One Watch: the current one. Two iPads: the Pro and the iPad. And so on.
Why would you care if Apple offers more models? Your wish makes no sense at all. What next, two color choices again?
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
You forgot the Xs & Xs Max. That makes 3 years of "S" models, with a break with the 8 model because they took it to 10 (X)!
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
You forgot the Xs & Xs Max. That makes 3 years of "S" models, with a break with the 8 model because they took it to 10 (X)!
I did forget that, and thanks. If Apple does an "s" models next year, then I will be proven wrong, but for this year, I think the iPhone 12 is baked in.
Comments
Hello, Macs.
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!)
+ ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Given that there are 900 million plus iPhone users worldwide, a family of four annual models of similar BOM, is not "a bad idea" for annual sales of 180 to 200 million iPhones in a mature market.
Today, in the handset world, Apple definitely cannot compete by remaining in the premium price band with just two models.
The current situation (with more models) is a direct result of not being able to increase sales over four years. Change began in 2017 and is continuing, but again, through necessity.
Apple actually took a fairly natural and evolutionary growth path to a wider, but still small set, of models over some 13 years of the iPhone. I would argue that the increase in models has more to do with Apple's Cupertino Headquarters completion, and increasing head count, than "market necessity" of increasing the models. Over those 13 years, Apple still maintains its leadership of revenues, margins, ASP's, and profits, over all of its competitors. I actually expect that Apple will launch a "super flagship" in a few years that will incorporate a higher level of leading/bleeding edge features and technology, but in a product initially designed to a much more constrained supply chain, due to the complexity of the technology, and maybe only a few million units a year, which would still be unlikely to meet demand in Apple's iPhone market.
I could make a compelling argument that your favorite device builder has way too many models, with little differentiation, which is a common theme in the Android OS device market, all driven by "necessity". Perhaps, it isn't too late for Huawei/Honor to focus on fewer models, and better marketing, but that is pointless, as Huawei doesn't compete much at all with Apple, and still has a ways to go to even compete well against Samsung, its main competitor.
For the record, I doubt that Apple will be able to increase sales beyond 200-220 million plus units in any given year, as the useful life cycle of the iPhone is so long, with the market bolstered by very valuable used iPhones. Still, you may be correct that Apple's desire to increase sales, and offset some ASP and margin loss against growth in services, will actually lead to unit sales growth for iPhone. That doesn't scream "necessity" as much as evolution in iPhone marketing in a mature market.
Supporting data;
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273006/apple-expenses-for-research-and-development/
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.