Piper on Leopard sales; Google phone OS; Xcode 2.5
Leopard's unusually strong sales on its first weekend show that the Mac user base is easily on the rise, according to estimates by Piper Jaffray. Also, Google may be leaping into the mobile OS space within days.
Analyst: Leopard proves Mac base growing
Piper Jaffray senior analyst Gene Munster issued a research note to investors on Tuesday which noted that Apple's sale of two million copies of Mac OS X Leopard during its first weekend on sale was a dramatic improvement that showed the new release was not simply profiting from existing users but triggering sales to first-time customers.
By comparison, Mac OS X Tiger took 39 days to reach the same sales mark -- a 13-fold increase despite a Mac OS X user base that had only doubled in the space of two and a half years. This could lead to about 3.5 million copies of Leopard sold before the end of the year and $92 million more income than expected during the quarter. But it also proved Apple's greater foothold on customers' minds in recent months, Munster said.
"From a high level, these numbers show that the Mac user base is growing," he said. "It also shows that it is an unusually active use base, with 9 percent of the 23 million users upgrading in just the first four days. Compared to the Windows user base, these numbers highlight the Mac's strong brand loyalty, and Apple's ability to sell more frequent operating system upgrades to a larger percentage of its user base."
WSJ claims Google mobile OS within two weeks
Adding to the string of rumors surrounding Google's mobile efforts, the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday hinted that Google was about to reveal its own platform for cellphones and other mobile devices, possibly announcing details within the next two weeks.
Citing "people familiar with the matter," the paper claimed that Google was writing an open-source platform that would break the stranglehold of carriers over software on their devices by making development inexpensive and flexible. Programmers could tap into a phone's GPS unit for map-related services, the Journal mentioned as an example. Gmail, YouTube, and other common Google services would be tailored for the platform.
Existing handset makers LG and HTC were likely candidates to produce phones based on the code, according to the report. In return, cellular carriers such as France's Orange, T-Mobile's US division, and 3 UK were allegedly destined to receive these new models.
Google refrained from commenting on the claims, which would set a release for actual devices sometime in mid-2008.
Asustek hints at larger Intel CPU shortage
Intel's processor manufacturing output is falling short of demand, according to a statement made by Asustek chief Jerry Shen at a conference on Tuesday.
The Taiwan PC builder's president explained that the supply of Intel's mobile processors "isn't meeting demand" for the holiday quarter, compounding previous issues with obtaining hard drives and LCDs. A strong relationship between Asustek and Intel ensured a steady supply but could leave smaller companies vulnerable, Shen said.
It was unclear as to whether the shortage would affect Apple. While Asustek has purportedly lost its MacBook contract to Quanta and so would not affect Apple specifically, a general shortage would hurt the latter firm by limiting its potential shipments. All of the Mac maker's systems save for the Mac Pro currently rely on mobile Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Extreme processors.
Xcode Developer Tools update
Apple quietly posted its Xcode 2.5 Developer Tools update for registered members of its Apple Developer website on Tuesday night.
The upgrade primarily addresses security issues in gdb and WebObjects. A buffer overflow in gdb's handling of TekHex content could let a malicious file quit a program or run arbitrary code, Apple said. In turn, the demo version of OpenBase included with Xcode's WebObjects package was disabled to prevent local users from gaining potentially dangerous OS privileges.
Developers using both Mac OS X Tiger and Leopard were equally affected, the company added.
Analyst: Leopard proves Mac base growing
Piper Jaffray senior analyst Gene Munster issued a research note to investors on Tuesday which noted that Apple's sale of two million copies of Mac OS X Leopard during its first weekend on sale was a dramatic improvement that showed the new release was not simply profiting from existing users but triggering sales to first-time customers.
By comparison, Mac OS X Tiger took 39 days to reach the same sales mark -- a 13-fold increase despite a Mac OS X user base that had only doubled in the space of two and a half years. This could lead to about 3.5 million copies of Leopard sold before the end of the year and $92 million more income than expected during the quarter. But it also proved Apple's greater foothold on customers' minds in recent months, Munster said.
"From a high level, these numbers show that the Mac user base is growing," he said. "It also shows that it is an unusually active use base, with 9 percent of the 23 million users upgrading in just the first four days. Compared to the Windows user base, these numbers highlight the Mac's strong brand loyalty, and Apple's ability to sell more frequent operating system upgrades to a larger percentage of its user base."
WSJ claims Google mobile OS within two weeks
Adding to the string of rumors surrounding Google's mobile efforts, the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday hinted that Google was about to reveal its own platform for cellphones and other mobile devices, possibly announcing details within the next two weeks.
Citing "people familiar with the matter," the paper claimed that Google was writing an open-source platform that would break the stranglehold of carriers over software on their devices by making development inexpensive and flexible. Programmers could tap into a phone's GPS unit for map-related services, the Journal mentioned as an example. Gmail, YouTube, and other common Google services would be tailored for the platform.
Existing handset makers LG and HTC were likely candidates to produce phones based on the code, according to the report. In return, cellular carriers such as France's Orange, T-Mobile's US division, and 3 UK were allegedly destined to receive these new models.
Google refrained from commenting on the claims, which would set a release for actual devices sometime in mid-2008.
Asustek hints at larger Intel CPU shortage
Intel's processor manufacturing output is falling short of demand, according to a statement made by Asustek chief Jerry Shen at a conference on Tuesday.
The Taiwan PC builder's president explained that the supply of Intel's mobile processors "isn't meeting demand" for the holiday quarter, compounding previous issues with obtaining hard drives and LCDs. A strong relationship between Asustek and Intel ensured a steady supply but could leave smaller companies vulnerable, Shen said.
It was unclear as to whether the shortage would affect Apple. While Asustek has purportedly lost its MacBook contract to Quanta and so would not affect Apple specifically, a general shortage would hurt the latter firm by limiting its potential shipments. All of the Mac maker's systems save for the Mac Pro currently rely on mobile Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Extreme processors.
Xcode Developer Tools update
Apple quietly posted its Xcode 2.5 Developer Tools update for registered members of its Apple Developer website on Tuesday night.
The upgrade primarily addresses security issues in gdb and WebObjects. A buffer overflow in gdb's handling of TekHex content could let a malicious file quit a program or run arbitrary code, Apple said. In turn, the demo version of OpenBase included with Xcode's WebObjects package was disabled to prevent local users from gaining potentially dangerous OS privileges.
Developers using both Mac OS X Tiger and Leopard were equally affected, the company added.
Comments
Piper Jaffray senior analyst Gene Munster issued a research note to developers on Tuesday which noted that Apple's sale of two million copies of Mac OS X Leopard during its first weekend on sale was a dramatic improvement that showed the new release was not simply profiting from existing users but triggering sales to first-time customers.
Really? First-time customers are buying Leopard? What exactly are these never-purchased-anything-Apple-before customers expecting to do with their shiny new DVD?
Really? First-time customers are buying Leopard? What exactly are these never-purchased-anything-Apple-before customers expecting to do with their shiny new DVD?
The two million copies of Mac OS X Leopard includes the versions that were included with new Macs sold during this period of time.
I strongly believe market share is growing and will continue to do so for a while yet.
It may possibly be slightly notable that the Up-To-Date period for leopard was almost twice as long as for Tiger, I would guess they include these copies in their count...
Piper Jaffray senior analyst Gene Munster issued a research note to developers on Tuesday which noted that Apple's sale of two million copies of Mac OS X Leopard during its first weekend on sale was a dramatic improvement that showed the new release was not simply profiting from existing users but triggering sales to first-time customers.
Why is Munster issuing research notes to Developers? I thought his audience would be investors?
Looks like his audience consists of developers who occasionally invest. Good catch! I'm asking cuz I'm not sure does anybody proofread anymore? Very happy that the Mac base is growing! Logic will slowly prevail
That's not a hint, that's pretty blatant.
Also, this is an atrocious sentence:
Google refrained from commenting on the claims, which would set a release for actual devices sometime in mid-2008.
At first glance, a reader might think that the 'mid-2008 release' is somehow a result of Google not commenting. You should've left the 'mid-2008' talk up in the same sentence that talked about the revealing of plans, and just ended this article with "Google declined to comment".
I see you are trying to rewrite articles you find on the internet so you can have an audience that stays on your site a little while, but that becomes such a waste of time in the end, and you get asses like myself telling you how poor your grammar is. You should turn AI into a link farm for Apple related articles, and maybe just pick out interesting points from articles. If you don't, I am sure someone else can and may do just that.
how are they calculating the revenue from sales of an operating system that lists for $129 for a single copy and $189 for a 5 user license.
3.5 Million copies multiplied by $129 equals $400+ Million of gross revenue.
Now, software is generally considered to be about 90 percent margin. Now obviously, Apple sells the product through distribution channels at some amount of discount for each copy.
I'll be willing to bet that not everyone that buys a 5 user license actually has 5 users that they install it on.
They mentioned they are calculating and extra $92 Million in revenue. I am just trying to figure out how they arrived at that number. Does anyone know exactly how they are calculating this $92 Million?
Just an observation. Am I missing something here?
I am just trying to figure out some math here.
how are they calculating the revenue from sales of an operating system that lists for $129 for a single copy and $189 for a 5 user license.
3.5 Million copies multiplied by $129 equals $400+ Million of gross revenue.
They mentioned they are calculating an extra $92 Million in revenue. I am just trying to figure out how they arrived at that number. Does anyone know exactly how they are calculating this $92 Million?
Just an observation. Am I missing something here?
It's not clear in the story, but I saw elsewhere that analysts had modeled their predictions on something like $250 million net revenue this quarter for Leopard. So if Apple sells 3.5 million copies (they figure a 60% profit margin) they say it will add $92 million more to what they already had predicted.
It's not clear in the story, but I saw elsewhere that analysts had modeled their predictions on something like $250 million net revenue this quarter for Leopard. So if Apple sells 3.5 million copies (they figure a 60% profit margin) they say it will add $92 million more to what they already had predicted.
$250 sounds a little more realistic, but again, if they can sell 2 million copies in a weekend, I am sure they'll surpass 3.5 million copies in 2+ months. I think these analysts are just being a little cautious per usual.
I think these guys don't know how to use a spreadsheet.
Apple has traditionally been conservative, the analysts more conservative and then the final numbers blow them away.
I think some of these analysts screw up the numbers on purpose to drive the stock down so they can buy at a lower price.
Last year, I think it was Forrester that said that the iPod and iTunes sales were flattening, but they were reading the charts wrong.
It's not clear in the story, but I saw elsewhere that analysts had modeled their predictions on something like $250 million net revenue this quarter for Leopard. So if Apple sells 3.5 million copies (they figure a 60% profit margin) they say it will add $92 million more to what they already had predicted.
60% profit margin? If you look at any software company they are usually 90% gross profit margin. It only costs a couple of bucks to put a DVD, a booklet in a little box. :-)
I think these analysts need to be a little more specific on their numbers.... LOL... Don't worry, I think they'll probably sell more like 5 million copies, maybe 8. The reports are quite favorable on this release and I think the user base is going to snatch this up BIG TIME!
Just my opinion.
Where is it that Google has demonstrated that are good at writing OS type software, again?
The rumor always seems to include the assumption that a Google phone would be quite the item, but why would we think that? Hooks to Google services, sure, that's nice, but those services are not exactly distinguished by their fluid, intuitive interfaces.
Google maps? Docs? Video? Hell, Google search, once you're past the basic search bar-- all of them can be called, at best, "functional". Functional to the point of suggesting that "UI" isn't something that Google thinks about much at all.
I mean, look at those sites, for God's sake. They mostly involve just sort of plopping whatever controls are necessary on a page, on after another, until all the controls are accounted for. Why on earth am I supposed to be expecting some kind of killer cell phone OS from these people?
Can anyone explain it to me?
OK, I'm going to ask what I always ask when the Google phone stuff gets bandied about:
Where is it that Google has demonstrated that are good at writing OS type software, again?
The rumor always seems to include the assumption that a Google phone would be quite the item, but why would we think that? Hooks to Google services, sure, that's nice, but those services are not exactly distinguished by their fluid, intuitive interfaces.
Google maps? Docs? Video? Hell, Google search, once you're past the basic search bar-- all of them can be called, at best, "functional". Functional to the point of suggesting that "UI" isn't something that Google thinks about much at all.
I mean, look at those sites, for God's sake. They mostly involve just sort of plopping whatever controls are necessary on a page, on after another, until all the controls are accounted for. Why on earth am I supposed to be expecting some kind of killer cell phone OS from these people?
Can anyone explain it to me?
I think the near $700 a share stock price tells the people at Google and the analysts that we should expect a killer cell phone product from them.... I don't see much substance on this one. Google is pretty much an advertising company. Isn't that where their revenue comes from?
OK, I'm going to ask what I always ask when the Google phone stuff gets bandied about:
Where is it that Google has demonstrated that are good at writing OS type software, again?
The rumor always seems to include the assumption that a Google phone would be quite the item, but why would we think that? Hooks to Google services, sure, that's nice, but those services are not exactly distinguished by their fluid, intuitive interfaces.
Google maps? Docs? Video? Hell, Google search, once you're past the basic search bar-- all of them can be called, at best, "functional". Functional to the point of suggesting that "UI" isn't something that Google thinks about much at all.
I mean, look at those sites, for God's sake. They mostly involve just sort of plopping whatever controls are necessary on a page, on after another, until all the controls are accounted for. Why on earth am I supposed to be expecting some kind of killer cell phone OS from these people?
Can anyone explain it to me?
Although I quite agree, please STEP AWAY FROM THE COFFEE!
OK, I'm going to ask what I always ask when the Google phone stuff gets bandied about:
Where is it that Google has demonstrated that are good at writing OS type software, again?
...
I mean, look at those sites, for God's sake. They mostly involve just sort of plopping whatever controls are necessary on a page, on after another, until all the controls are accounted for. Why on earth am I supposed to be expecting some kind of killer cell phone OS from these people?
People say the same things about Microsoft's UI, but they've done pretty well for themselves anyway. Google has well for themselves too. I really don't doubt that Google can do this, they aren't technology slouches. Some of the stuff I've heard about is pretty amazing.
Really? First-time customers are buying Leopard? What exactly are these never-purchased-anything-Apple-before customers expecting to do with their shiny new DVD?
Like everybodyelse who buys a new Mac.
"I'll be willing to bet that not everyone that buys a 5 user license actually has 5 users that they install it on."
does Apple consider a 5 user license the same as 5 copies sold?
also, how many people used up their iPhone $100 store credit to pick up leopard for 30 bucks?