The holiday quarter was all about the iPhone. There was a lot of noise about the Kindle. While I don't expect iPad 2 users to be upgrading in droves, original iPad owners should be, given the camera and the retina display. It is a major update, especially if you didn't get 64GB the first time around.
Businesses have an even more compelling case to look at iPad, especially with people in sales or transient/non-traditional office roles.
Part of me thinks 20 is still pretty conservative, but it might take another quarter for many of the sales to materialize. I can almost picture iPads rivaling the iPhone (albeit at a lower ASP).
II agree with your assessments of the iPad -- the new iPad retina display, alone, opens the iPad to enterprise uses that cannot be performed by traditional computer screen resolutions... medical, scientific, training...
I am reminded of a $1 million contract we won with the US Army Command and Control College, Ft. Leavenworth KS -- in the early 1980's. This was for 100 "color" computers. networked with 3 20-MB HDDs. The computers were used for war gaming and training. The color monitors were 15" SD TV Displays without TV tuners. They were controlled by 3D Number9 graphics card at $100 each. The computers were Corvus Concepts with HD BW bitmapped displays. The Concept Display could be rotated to portrait or landscape mode. The Concept preceded the Mac * intro -- but the hardware was very similar (except for the display) and was expandable by use of Apple ][ cards. The Concept contained a maximum of 1 MB RAM.
These behemoths were state-of-the-art: "The Corvus was HANDS DOWN a way better PC than an Intel/IBM PC and if performance were the only criteria it should have had that market."
Anyway that was $1 Million in 1982 dollars -- about $5 million today.
The interesting thing is that even the smallest new iPad at $500 has hardware and software capabilities way beyond the Concept.
So, for the price of a Mac (shared HDD), some wireless routers, and some disk drives you could buy a better solution for about 1/10 of the price (today's dollars). Add a few AppleTVs and any student or instructor could AirPlay his iPad to an HDTV.
When you think of where we were 30 years ago, it is amazing how far we have come -- and yes, the iPad can do everything that those state-of-the art computers could do... and much, much more! And do it faster, better, easier and be taken out of the classroom into the field.
* While he was working on the development of the original Mac, Andy Hertzfeld walked into our store and plopped down cash for a loaded Corvus Concept (about $4,999, AIR). He said it wasn't for him -- it was for "Jaron". "Jaron" would come by later in the week to pick it up -- no burn-in, check-out or training were needed (standard services provided by our store). Jaron picked up the Concept while I was out, so I never saw him... I suspect that Apple paid for the computer and "Jaron" was Jaron Lanier (working on some Mac-related project for Apple).
All the competitors generally report revenue (sales) the same way and use the same basic rules to determine when a sale occurred. Apple goes one step further to comment on channel inventory as reported by resellers.
The Author's claim that there will be 20M sales doesn't mean to an end-user. He's talking about direct-to-consumer and to resellers combined. Apple only gets paid once for that iPad. If a retailer or distributor purchased it for resale but it's still sitting in a stockroom or on the shelf, it still counted as a sale as far as Apple is concerned. That's what Apple is reporting when it claims x-number sold, and that's the number that Wolf is referencing, not the estimated number that were purchased by end-users alone.
Yes, but unless the number in the channel changes, the two numbers are the same. Apple generally has only a small number in the channel and the number is fairly constant.
Unfortunately, I don't think that they'll let anybody in to the cockpit anymore. But you're right, the pilots are probably using them too.
When I was a kid, I was once allowed to sit in the cockpit of a 747 for a few minutes during flight, but I imagine that those days are long gone, thanks to a bunch of douchebags.
The new iPad retina is awesome! I can believe 20 million, or even more sold. We'll see.
I'll be taking a flight later on tonight. I'm going to count how many iPads I see on the plane. I bet that the number won't be small.
Agreed! It is one amazing device. Every time I pick it up I need to fight the urge to upgrade the iPad 1 the kids have, just because mine is so insanely gorgeous.
I spoke to a couple guys at my local Apple store a few weeks back, and they said they're selling like crazy. I asked them about it cannibalizing laptop sales; they wouldn't say or didn't know, but as we were talking it became even more apparent to me that Apple is on-boarding so many new customers with their iOS devices that subsequent laptop sales may very well exceed any possible cannibalization from the iOS devices themselves. My wife is a prime example of this -- she fell in love with her iPad so much that she bought a Macbook Pro for home. I saw the same thing with a co-worker who bought an iPad last Christmas and since has bought a Macbook Pro for home and got the company to buy another one for the office.
I can't wait until they make a serious play for the living room. I have a big open hole in my entertainment center waiting for a 55" Apple Television. ;-)
II agree with your assessments of the iPad -- the new iPad retina display, alone, opens the iPad to enterprise uses that cannot be performed by traditional computer screen resolutions... medical, scientific, training...
I am reminded of a $1 million contract we won with the US Army Command and Control College, Ft. Leavenworth KS -- in the early 1980's. This was for 100 "color" computers. networked with 3 20-MB HDDs. The computers were used for war gaming and training. The color monitors were 15" SD TV Displays without TV tuners. They were controlled by 3D Number9 graphics card at $100 each. The computers were Corvus Concepts with HD BW bitmapped displays. The Concept Display could be rotated to portrait or landscape mode. The Concept preceded the Mac * intro -- but the hardware was very similar (except for the display) and was expandable by use of Apple ][ cards. The Concept contained a maximum of 1 MB RAM.
These behemoths were state-of-the-art: "The Corvus was HANDS DOWN a way better PC than an Intel/IBM PC and if performance were the only criteria it should have had that market."
Anyway that was $1 Million in 1982 dollars -- about $5 million today.
The interesting thing is that even the smallest new iPad at $500 has hardware and software capabilities way beyond the Concept.
So, for the price of a Mac (shared HDD), some wireless routers, and some disk drives you could buy a better solution for about 1/10 of the price (today's dollars). Add a few AppleTVs and any student or instructor could AirPlay his iPad to an HDTV.
When you think of where we were 30 years ago, it is amazing how far we have come -- and yes, the iPad can do everything that those state-of-the art computers could do... and much, much more! And do it faster, better, easier and be taken out of the classroom into the field.
* While he was working on the development of the original Mac, Andy Hertzfeld walked into our store and plopped down cash for a loaded Corvus Concept (about $4,999, AIR). He said it wasn't for him -- it was for "Jaron". "Jaron" would come by later in the week to pick it up -- no burn-in, check-out or training were needed (standard services provided by our store). Jaron picked up the Concept while I was out, so I never saw him... I suspect that Apple paid for the computer and "Jaron" was Jaron Lanier (working on some Mac-related project for Apple).
I love having people like you around here - so much history, it's awesome. You've probably been asked before, but are you still working in the industry? Do you have any current ties to Apple?
You're right, it's amazing to think how far computers have come. My iPod is four years old and the lowest model but it would destroy that Corvus computer. You can probably get watches today with more power.
I love having people like you around here - so much history, it's awesome. You've probably been asked before, but are you still working in the industry? Do you have any current ties to Apple?
You're right, it's amazing to think how far computers have come. My iPod is four years old and the lowest model but it would destroy that Corvus computer. You can probably get watches today with more power.
No, not working -- retired in 1989 at age 50 when we sold the computer stores -- total burnout. I have no ties to anyone at Apple -- though I am a shareholder, customer and a self-motivated evangelist for Apple and Apple products.
Apple recently free-replaced an iPad mini (the one that was in danger of catching fire) with a new nano (the square touch screen one). I Bought a $50 watch band for it and gave it to my youngest grandson... that, too, is much more powerful than the Corvus Concept.
Ha! When Corvus went out of business, the founders bought an IBM PC/jr from us, then used it as a basis to make a specialized computer that could add titles and effects to videotapes... They formed a company named Videonics, that made a nice, inexpensive consumer product for creating good looking home videos.
It is interesting that you can do a much better job with iMovie on a iPad, iPhone or iPod Touch.
Yes, but unless the number in the channel changes, the two numbers are the same. Apple generally has only a small number in the channel and the number is fairly constant.
Agreed. If they never changed. Doesn't the number always fluctuate? Personally I expect the channel numbers to be up somewhat in this particular quarter. Apple sounds as tho they had all the pieces in place for a product launch in China, but held up by arguments over naming rights. With that settled they can finally proceed. Purely guessing that they already had product there, just not able to put it our for sale until very recently.
20 million would be amazing. If that were combined into the broader PC market, iPads would account for ~20% of sold units all by itself.
The tablet market is growing by leaps whereas the PC market is struggling for growth. That's all you need to understand why Microsoft has put out Surface. MSFT has let Apple dominate the market for practically 3 years by the time both Surface models are released.
Another thing to keep in mind: there's a good chance that Apple will sell more than 70 million iPads this year, not accounting for the mythical mini iPad. If they do, the iPad's yearly sales will have reached the number of Xbox 360s sold in its seven year lifespan. The comparison is of two different markets, but it's also a clear indicator of the type of growth we're seeing.
If this turns out to be true then I find this absolutely amazing. I've put the number at 14 million. I realize the RD v3 came out this year but I just couldn't see Apple besting the holiday quarter numbers until the next holiday quarter.
I'm sure that if the number is over 15 million then it has to be businesses that are driving the sales.
It would be nice, but this looks like another set-up to short AAPL by this bozo. Just you wait... "disappointing iPad numbers"... LOL.
I wish tech reporters would have a rule that would only note the top 5 (or so) analysts from the last quarter. If the Internets did this then perhaps they would try harder to be more accurate so they can get automatic recognition the next quarter.
I say we put it to a community vote.
AppleInsider should only quote the top 5 most accurate Apple stock analysts, based on 5 consecutive years of reporting.
They should also never again mention DigiTimes. Ever.
iPad sales are tanking, not growing. EVERYBODY is waiting for the Surface and the Nexus 7 don't you know. When these babies come out the iPad will be but a distant memory. Just ask anybody. ;-)
Yes. A quick visit to The Verge's community threads would convince the lazy and uninformed that Google's Surface is the Second Coming and all Android phones are flying off the shelves into the hands of eager, app-devouring consumers ready to pay millions of developers for their hard earned software.... So get on board, already! Android roolz! Woohoo! /s
Yes. A quick visit to The Verge's community threads would convince the lazy and uninformed that Google's Surface is the Second Coming and all Android phones are flying off the shelves into the hands of eager, app-devouring consumers ready to pay millions of developers for their hard earned software.... So get on board, already! Android roolz! Woohoo! /s
Ummm.. . . I think you might be getting confused. The Surface is a Microsoft endeavor.
AppleInsider should only quote the top 5 most accurate Apple stock analysts, based on 5 consecutive years of reporting.
They should also never again mention DigiTimes. Ever.
All those in favor?
What makes you think that such a group would have any better ability to predict the future? Can you back it up with some evidence?
Gobs of research I've seen says that they would not -- you can slice and dice them into subgroups any which way, and they would not. Indeed, if they had that kind of ability, all that a less skilled analyst would have to do is to follow their recommendation, so that they too could look like a genius and get similarly rewarded, no?
What makes you think that such a group would have any better ability to predict the future? Can you back it up with some evidence?
Gobs of research I've seen says that they would not -- you can slice and dice them into subgroups any which way, and they would not. Indeed, if they had that kind of ability, all that a less skilled analyst would have to do is to follow their recommendation, so that they too could look like a genius and get similarly rewarded, no?
A five year proven track record isn't enough for you?
Based on some relatively recent statements out of Shaw Wu it is my opinion that he might just be one of those overpaid-at-any-price analysts who have referred to online projections and statements. I'm not going to dig up the exact date and time of what I'm referring to, but I made a mental note of it at the time and found it very interesting, if not metaphysically coincidental... just my opinion, mind you.
Whereas, Philip Elmer Dewitt has been keeping track and quite accurately points out that the paid analysts have been doing a terrible job. Their advice should be avoided. What part of that do you deny?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh
The holiday quarter was all about the iPhone. There was a lot of noise about the Kindle. While I don't expect iPad 2 users to be upgrading in droves, original iPad owners should be, given the camera and the retina display. It is a major update, especially if you didn't get 64GB the first time around.
Businesses have an even more compelling case to look at iPad, especially with people in sales or transient/non-traditional office roles.
Part of me thinks 20 is still pretty conservative, but it might take another quarter for many of the sales to materialize. I can almost picture iPads rivaling the iPhone (albeit at a lower ASP).
II agree with your assessments of the iPad -- the new iPad retina display, alone, opens the iPad to enterprise uses that cannot be performed by traditional computer screen resolutions... medical, scientific, training...
I am reminded of a $1 million contract we won with the US Army Command and Control College, Ft. Leavenworth KS -- in the early 1980's. This was for 100 "color" computers. networked with 3 20-MB HDDs. The computers were used for war gaming and training. The color monitors were 15" SD TV Displays without TV tuners. They were controlled by 3D Number9 graphics card at $100 each. The computers were Corvus Concepts with HD BW bitmapped displays. The Concept Display could be rotated to portrait or landscape mode. The Concept preceded the Mac * intro -- but the hardware was very similar (except for the display) and was expandable by use of Apple ][ cards. The Concept contained a maximum of 1 MB RAM.
http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=653
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corvus_Systems
These behemoths were state-of-the-art: "The Corvus was HANDS DOWN a way better PC than an Intel/IBM PC and if performance were the only criteria it should have had that market."
Anyway that was $1 Million in 1982 dollars -- about $5 million today.
The interesting thing is that even the smallest new iPad at $500 has hardware and software capabilities way beyond the Concept.
So, for the price of a Mac (shared HDD), some wireless routers, and some disk drives you could buy a better solution for about 1/10 of the price (today's dollars). Add a few AppleTVs and any student or instructor could AirPlay his iPad to an HDTV.
When you think of where we were 30 years ago, it is amazing how far we have come -- and yes, the iPad can do everything that those state-of-the art computers could do... and much, much more! And do it faster, better, easier and be taken out of the classroom into the field.
* While he was working on the development of the original Mac, Andy Hertzfeld walked into our store and plopped down cash for a loaded Corvus Concept (about $4,999, AIR). He said it wasn't for him -- it was for "Jaron". "Jaron" would come by later in the week to pick it up -- no burn-in, check-out or training were needed (standard services provided by our store). Jaron picked up the Concept while I was out, so I never saw him... I suspect that Apple paid for the computer and "Jaron" was Jaron Lanier (working on some Mac-related project for Apple).
Aside from "journalistic integrity" being an oxymoron, I believe that it died in 1799 - about the time of Thomas Paine's death [1809].
The new iPad retina is awesome! I can believe 20 million, or even more sold. We'll see.
I'll be taking a flight later on tonight. I'm going to count how many iPads I see on the plane. I bet that the number won't be small.
Oh, maybe because he's read your posts.
Yes, but unless the number in the channel changes, the two numbers are the same. Apple generally has only a small number in the channel and the number is fairly constant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
The new iPad retina is awesome! I can believe 20 million, or even more sold. We'll see.
I'll be taking a flight later on tonight. I'm going to count how many iPads I see on the plane. I bet that the number won't be small.
Don't forget to include the flight crew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Don't forget to include the flight crew
Unfortunately, I don't think that they'll let anybody in to the cockpit anymore.
When I was a kid, I was once allowed to sit in the cockpit of a 747 for a few minutes during flight, but I imagine that those days are long gone, thanks to a bunch of douchebags.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
The new iPad retina is awesome! I can believe 20 million, or even more sold. We'll see.
I'll be taking a flight later on tonight. I'm going to count how many iPads I see on the plane. I bet that the number won't be small.
Agreed! It is one amazing device. Every time I pick it up I need to fight the urge to upgrade the iPad 1 the kids have, just because mine is so insanely gorgeous.
I spoke to a couple guys at my local Apple store a few weeks back, and they said they're selling like crazy. I asked them about it cannibalizing laptop sales; they wouldn't say or didn't know, but as we were talking it became even more apparent to me that Apple is on-boarding so many new customers with their iOS devices that subsequent laptop sales may very well exceed any possible cannibalization from the iOS devices themselves. My wife is a prime example of this -- she fell in love with her iPad so much that she bought a Macbook Pro for home. I saw the same thing with a co-worker who bought an iPad last Christmas and since has bought a Macbook Pro for home and got the company to buy another one for the office.
I can't wait until they make a serious play for the living room. I have a big open hole in my entertainment center waiting for a 55" Apple Television. ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
II agree with your assessments of the iPad -- the new iPad retina display, alone, opens the iPad to enterprise uses that cannot be performed by traditional computer screen resolutions... medical, scientific, training...
I am reminded of a $1 million contract we won with the US Army Command and Control College, Ft. Leavenworth KS -- in the early 1980's. This was for 100 "color" computers. networked with 3 20-MB HDDs. The computers were used for war gaming and training. The color monitors were 15" SD TV Displays without TV tuners. They were controlled by 3D Number9 graphics card at $100 each. The computers were Corvus Concepts with HD BW bitmapped displays. The Concept Display could be rotated to portrait or landscape mode. The Concept preceded the Mac * intro -- but the hardware was very similar (except for the display) and was expandable by use of Apple ][ cards. The Concept contained a maximum of 1 MB RAM.
http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=653
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corvus_Systems
These behemoths were state-of-the-art: "The Corvus was HANDS DOWN a way better PC than an Intel/IBM PC and if performance were the only criteria it should have had that market."
Anyway that was $1 Million in 1982 dollars -- about $5 million today.
The interesting thing is that even the smallest new iPad at $500 has hardware and software capabilities way beyond the Concept.
So, for the price of a Mac (shared HDD), some wireless routers, and some disk drives you could buy a better solution for about 1/10 of the price (today's dollars). Add a few AppleTVs and any student or instructor could AirPlay his iPad to an HDTV.
When you think of where we were 30 years ago, it is amazing how far we have come -- and yes, the iPad can do everything that those state-of-the art computers could do... and much, much more! And do it faster, better, easier and be taken out of the classroom into the field.
* While he was working on the development of the original Mac, Andy Hertzfeld walked into our store and plopped down cash for a loaded Corvus Concept (about $4,999, AIR). He said it wasn't for him -- it was for "Jaron". "Jaron" would come by later in the week to pick it up -- no burn-in, check-out or training were needed (standard services provided by our store). Jaron picked up the Concept while I was out, so I never saw him... I suspect that Apple paid for the computer and "Jaron" was Jaron Lanier (working on some Mac-related project for Apple).
I love having people like you around here - so much history, it's awesome. You've probably been asked before, but are you still working in the industry? Do you have any current ties to Apple?
You're right, it's amazing to think how far computers have come. My iPod is four years old and the lowest model but it would destroy that Corvus computer. You can probably get watches today with more power.
One word:
DAMN!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LighteningKid
I love having people like you around here - so much history, it's awesome. You've probably been asked before, but are you still working in the industry? Do you have any current ties to Apple?
You're right, it's amazing to think how far computers have come. My iPod is four years old and the lowest model but it would destroy that Corvus computer. You can probably get watches today with more power.
No, not working -- retired in 1989 at age 50 when we sold the computer stores -- total burnout. I have no ties to anyone at Apple -- though I am a shareholder, customer and a self-motivated evangelist for Apple and Apple products.
Apple recently free-replaced an iPad mini (the one that was in danger of catching fire) with a new nano (the square touch screen one). I Bought a $50 watch band for it and gave it to my youngest grandson... that, too, is much more powerful than the Corvus Concept.
Ha! When Corvus went out of business, the founders bought an IBM PC/jr from us, then used it as a basis to make a specialized computer that could add titles and effects to videotapes... They formed a company named Videonics, that made a nice, inexpensive consumer product for creating good looking home videos.
It is interesting that you can do a much better job with iMovie on a iPad, iPhone or iPod Touch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Yes, but unless the number in the channel changes, the two numbers are the same. Apple generally has only a small number in the channel and the number is fairly constant.
Agreed. If they never changed. Doesn't the number always fluctuate? Personally I expect the channel numbers to be up somewhat in this particular quarter. Apple sounds as tho they had all the pieces in place for a product launch in China, but held up by arguments over naming rights. With that settled they can finally proceed. Purely guessing that they already had product there, just not able to put it our for sale until very recently.
20 million would be amazing. If that were combined into the broader PC market, iPads would account for ~20% of sold units all by itself.
The tablet market is growing by leaps whereas the PC market is struggling for growth. That's all you need to understand why Microsoft has put out Surface. MSFT has let Apple dominate the market for practically 3 years by the time both Surface models are released.
Another thing to keep in mind: there's a good chance that Apple will sell more than 70 million iPads this year, not accounting for the mythical mini iPad. If they do, the iPad's yearly sales will have reached the number of Xbox 360s sold in its seven year lifespan. The comparison is of two different markets, but it's also a clear indicator of the type of growth we're seeing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
If this turns out to be true then I find this absolutely amazing. I've put the number at 14 million. I realize the RD v3 came out this year but I just couldn't see Apple besting the holiday quarter numbers until the next holiday quarter.
I'm sure that if the number is over 15 million then it has to be businesses that are driving the sales.
It would be nice, but this looks like another set-up to short AAPL by this bozo. Just you wait... "disappointing iPad numbers"... LOL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I wish tech reporters would have a rule that would only note the top 5 (or so) analysts from the last quarter. If the Internets did this then perhaps they would try harder to be more accurate so they can get automatic recognition the next quarter.
I say we put it to a community vote.
AppleInsider should only quote the top 5 most accurate Apple stock analysts, based on 5 consecutive years of reporting.
They should also never again mention DigiTimes. Ever.
All those in favor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
iPad sales are tanking, not growing. EVERYBODY is waiting for the Surface and the Nexus 7 don't you know. When these babies come out the iPad will be but a distant memory. Just ask anybody. ;-)
Yes. A quick visit to The Verge's community threads would convince the lazy and uninformed that Google's Surface is the Second Coming and all Android phones are flying off the shelves into the hands of eager, app-devouring consumers ready to pay millions of developers for their hard earned software.... So get on board, already! Android roolz! Woohoo! /s
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Yes. A quick visit to The Verge's community threads would convince the lazy and uninformed that Google's Surface is the Second Coming and all Android phones are flying off the shelves into the hands of eager, app-devouring consumers ready to pay millions of developers for their hard earned software.... So get on board, already! Android roolz! Woohoo! /s
Ummm.. . . I think you might be getting confused. The Surface is a Microsoft endeavor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I say we put it to a community vote.
AppleInsider should only quote the top 5 most accurate Apple stock analysts, based on 5 consecutive years of reporting.
They should also never again mention DigiTimes. Ever.
All those in favor?
What makes you think that such a group would have any better ability to predict the future? Can you back it up with some evidence?
Gobs of research I've seen says that they would not -- you can slice and dice them into subgroups any which way, and they would not. Indeed, if they had that kind of ability, all that a less skilled analyst would have to do is to follow their recommendation, so that they too could look like a genius and get similarly rewarded, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Ummm.. . . I think you might be getting confused. The Surface is a Microsoft endeavor.
Oof! I misspoke... about the 10th time today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
What makes you think that such a group would have any better ability to predict the future? Can you back it up with some evidence?
Gobs of research I've seen says that they would not -- you can slice and dice them into subgroups any which way, and they would not. Indeed, if they had that kind of ability, all that a less skilled analyst would have to do is to follow their recommendation, so that they too could look like a genius and get similarly rewarded, no?
A five year proven track record isn't enough for you?
Based on some relatively recent statements out of Shaw Wu it is my opinion that he might just be one of those overpaid-at-any-price analysts who have referred to online projections and statements. I'm not going to dig up the exact date and time of what I'm referring to, but I made a mental note of it at the time and found it very interesting, if not metaphysically coincidental... just my opinion, mind you.
Whereas, Philip Elmer Dewitt has been keeping track and quite accurately points out that the paid analysts have been doing a terrible job. Their advice should be avoided. What part of that do you deny?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
A five year proven track record isn't enough for you?
That was not my question! Would you like me to restate it?