Editorial: 2013 was a terrible year for both Apple's competitors and its media critics

13468913

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 257

    @dequardo:

     

    Wow.

     

    Given that you are obviously and expert in this space, please provide links to your most recent work and analysis so that we can be enlightened.  I look forward to reading your exhaustive and detailed analysis of this marketplace.

     

    The links?

  • Reply 102 of 257
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Both Google and Amazon stocks are up 58% year-to-date; Microsoft is up 40%. If these companies have had a terrible year it's certainly not reflected in their stock price. Compare that with Apple which is up a paltry 5% year-to-date even though the S&P 500 is up 29% and the Nasdaq is up 38%. How is it that Google and Microsoft stock is up double digits if they had such a bad year?

     

    Google, Amazon and Microsoft didn't have a bad year in most respects... but, in some they did.

     

    Apple also didn't have a bad year in most respects... but, in some it did.

     

    This story focuses mostly on the bad year in analysis of Apple.

  • Reply 103 of 257
    Originally Posted by hungover View Post

    If Apple had invented laptops, All in Ones and OSes then it would have a degree of creditability.


     

    But they did invent modern laptops, modern all in ones, and modern OS’. 

     

    Who put the keyboard in the back? Apple.

    Who turned the iMac into the transition device for desktop multitouch? Apple.

    Who too two code bases and built OS X on them? Apple.

     

    Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post

    Do you seriously think this is true? Apple gets loads of positive media attention - probably more than any other tech company.


     

    I got into trouble before for pointing out how mind-numbingly stupid it is to say what you’ve said here.

     

    Don’t make me get into trouble again. Just know that you’re wretchedly incorrect.

     

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

    So which part is it where Apple made money for me.

     

    Let’s see, they do your advertising, your hosting, your SEO, they created your code base, created the platforms on which your software sells in the first place…

     

    If this is too difficult for you to understand, feel free to let us know.

     

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

    Why are you repeating what I replied to?

     

    Because your reply was nonsensical tripe that didn’t do anything to refute what was being said.

     

    Look, you don’t have the slightest clue what you’re talking about. Just stop. Go read about the chicken and the egg and why what you’re saying ISN’T applicable here.

  • Reply 104 of 257
    Great article DED! Was wondering where you were. What a great Christmas present read.
  • Reply 105 of 257
    rogifan wrote: »

    In 2014 i think the most important people at Apple will be Jony Ive and Angela Ahrendts. I've creating lust worthy products and Ahrendts selling them. As the markets that Apple competes and become more and more commoditized fashion becomes ever more important. Of course having a platform that people want to develop for is super important too. But Apple can't really compete on pure hardware specs, so designing products that people lust after will be huge. Take the nMP. I've seen so many Twitter posts from people who say they don't need one but want one. 64-bit isn't sexy. Hearing Jony Ive in his English accent talking about highly polished diamond cut chamfered edges gets people every time. I hope Tim Cook ignores the calls to get into the low end. That would be disaster for Apple.

    ^^^ This!


    I would add:
    • Large, Powerful iPad
    • Ramifications of free iWork / iLife and iOS / OSX
    • iCloud versions of iWork / iLife (feature compatible with iOS and OSX)
    • Maps and Map Services enhancements
    • iTunes Store Services for Retail / iTunes Specie

    And, of course:

    1000
  • Reply 106 of 257
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    And Apple wouldn't make 30% if developers didn’t make apps for them.

    Going around in circles are we? Brilliant reasoning skills there.

    The App Store is a multi-billion dollar industry that DID NOT EXIST until Apple created the iPhone and the entire ecosystem surrounding it. As TS said, this isn't a "chicken and egg" case where they both started together and share credit for its success. Apple deserves most of the credit.
  • Reply 107 of 257
    I found your editorial interesting. The information in this editorial is good. The quality of the writing, however, is not. Please hire an editor. Some of your sentences are the length of a paragraph. In places you use the same word multiple times in a single sentence (e.g. "entire"). Your sentence structure is abysmal. Finally, your use of complex adjectives next to seldom-used nouns makes for difficult reading.Taken together, these characteristics make your editorial difficult to read. They diminish the impact of the actual content.

    Strive for clarity. Permit only one idea per sentence. Avoid using too many adjectives for dramatic effect. These suggestions should help you communicate your thoughts more clearly.
  • Reply 108 of 257
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    And Apple wouldn't make 30% if developers didn’t make apps for them.

    Going around in circles are we? Brilliant reasoning skills there.

    The App Store is a multi-billion dollar industry that DID NOT EXIST until Apple created the iPhone and the entire ecosystem surrounding it. As TS said, this isn't a "chicken and egg" case where they both started together and share credit for its success. Apple deserves most of the credit.


    "If you build it, He will come"

    --Field Of Dreams


    "If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas”

    -- Dandy Don


    "...we could all stand in a circle with our hands in each other’s pockets and somehow get rich."

    --Paul Harvey
  • Reply 109 of 257
    A lot of this is correct. But the article fails to mention it was a terrible year for Apple investors, Apple apologists and Apple Inc too. The stock price tanked 40% because there were no significant product releases for most of 2013, Apple didn't declare the Special Dividend (it should have) like almost every other responsible company did at the end of 2012, and a lot of what Apple did in 2013 was ho hum and underwhwlming. The 5C has yet to prove itself and Maverick still needs serious tweaking IMO.

    At ant rate it was a terrible year for Apple too. Stop with the apologies and rationalizations already AI.
  • Reply 110 of 257
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Does Apple pay developers to make apps for their ecosystem? No. I can't become a developer and automatically get money from Apple.

    Actually, they do. Pages, Numbers, Keynote... ;)

    As for independent entrepreneurs, you have a mighty sense of entitlement going on there.
  • Reply 111 of 257
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    mj web wrote: »
    A lot of this is correct. But the article fails to mention it was a terrible year for Apple investors, Apple apologists and Apple Inc too. The stock price tanked 40% because there were no significant product releases for most of 2013, Apple didn't declare the Special Dividend (it should have) like almost every other responsible company did at the end of 2012, and a lot of what Apple did in 2013 was ho hum and underwhwlming. The 5C has yet to prove itself and Maverick still needs serious tweaking IMO.

    At ant rate it was a terrible year for Apple too. Stop with the apologies and rationalizations already AI.

    Stock price on 1/1/13: 549 (in 12/27/12: 509). Stock price today: 560.

    That's some hell of a 40% drop.

    Wait a sec.
  • Reply 112 of 257
    mj web wrote: »
    A lot of this is correct. But the article fails to mention it was a terrible year for Apple investors, Apple apologists and Apple Inc too. The stock price tanked 40% because there were no significant product releases for most of 2013, Apple didn't declare the Special Dividend (it should have) like almost every other responsible company did at the end of 2012, and a lot of what Apple did in 2013 was ho hum and underwhwlming. The 5C has yet to prove itself and Maverick still needs serious tweaking IMO.

    At ant rate it was a terrible year for Apple too. Stop with the apologies and rationalizations already AI.

    1) Why exactly should Apple release a special dividend? What do you think a special dividend would have done to the stock? Shot it past it's temporary 2012 peak?

    2) Stocks fluctuate. If you are an investor you just have to accept that. It's also gambling so you can't simply look at a successful company (like Apple) and expect the stocks to grow because the company is profitable or expect a stock to drop upon hearing about quarterly losses (like BB and Amazon) because there is emotion involved in these decisions. It's not rational but it's a reality.

    3) Apple doesn't have product releases for most of the year. They never have. You can't have a new product every week and since Apple only has 4 legs of business — Mac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad — with the first not being a major consideration for the majority, the second dropping each year because of the iOS-based iDevices are dominating it, you really only have 2 categories that the market and media really care about. You can't have a new iPhone and IPhone released every week or even every month or every 3 months. It's unrealistic.

    4) The worse thing Apple can do is to over extend themselves and dilute their brand by flooding the market with more product categories for the sake of it. They have the dominate mindshare so everything if already compared to an Apple product if Apple makes something in that category. Let's remember the time between the Mac and iPod and the iPod and iPhone. Just because the iPhone and iPad were only 3 years apart doesn't mean everything else can be this expedited.

    5) What does the iPhone 5C have to prove? What did the iPhone 4S, or iPhone 4, or iPhone 4GS all have to prove in their second year? From what I've seen the numbers are impressive and I, anecdotally, see plenty of 5C's in public which is impressive because unlike any flagship product there is no reason for people to run out and get last year's HW.

    6) Every time Apple releases a new OS update people complain. Your complaint that it "still needs serious tweaking" says nothing about what is wrong with it, but on this point I agree, because all OSes need serious tweaking. There are bugs to fix and refinements to be made constantly but I see nothing about Mavericks that would make it a bane to Mac users, hurt sales, or the stock price which is what your inclusion of Mavericks suggests.
  • Reply 113 of 257
    jungmark wrote: »
    Stock price on 1/1/13: 549 (in 12/27/12: 509). Stock price today: 560.

    That's some hell of a 40% drop.

    Wait a sec.

    All my points and I forget to add that one. I even grabbed a screenshot before I posted.

    1000
  • Reply 114 of 257
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,312member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    Why are you repeating what I replied to? The fact is that Apple needs devs and devs need Apple. If Apple made money for devs then they'd all be profitable but the truth is that the vast majority never break even. Apple could very easily allow the side loading of apps and not concern themselves with storage and transactions but then they'd miss out on all the money that the devs would make.

    Gee, it isn't enough that there are so many me-too apps from developers already, but now you want to open up the Walled Garden to uncertified crap? I'll bet those unprofitable devs would be unprofitable on any platform. Maybe they should consider other lines of work?

     

    Here's a hint; don't like the App Store rules? Google play awaits.

  • Reply 115 of 257
    While all the rumors of new products and features by the Analysts certainly drum up excitement they are purely guesses.. It's time foe everyone to realize that the only thing that gets out to the public is what Applecwants you to know Remember that the Analysts are stock chutneys trying to manipulate interest inthe stock towards the sell or buy side. With little knowledge when it comes to Apple
  • Reply 116 of 257
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,312member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    In 2014 i think the most important people at Apple will be Jony Ive and Angela Ahrendts. I've creating lust worthy products and Ahrendts selling them. As the markets that Apple competes and become more and more commoditized fashion becomes ever more important. Of course having a platform that people want to develop for is super important too. But Apple can't really compete on pure hardware specs, so designing products that people lust after will be huge. Take the nMP. I've seen so many Twitter posts from people who say they don't need one but want one. 64-bit isn't sexy. Hearing Jony Ive in his English accent talking about highly polished diamond cut chamfered edges gets people every time. I hope Tim Cook ignores the calls to get into the low end. That would be disaster for Apple.

    Uhm, more like Apple doesn't need to compete on pure hardware specs because they aren't in the Android market and don't have to compete with Android OEM's at that level. Apple came out with the 64bit because they had and have plans to take advantage of it today and into the futue. More to the point, all of the Android OEM's target low, mid and high end sales; Apple sells only premium smartphones.

     

    News; those flagship phones from vendors other than Samsung (let's just say $10B a year in marketing) don't sell enough for the OEM's to make a profit, and Google subsidizes its Nexus phones. As for commoditization, bet that the Android OEM's and Samsung are suffering much more than Apple.

  • Reply 117 of 257
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,312member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by williamneildrake View Post



    I found your editorial interesting. The information in this editorial is good. The quality of the writing, however, is not. Please hire an editor. Some of your sentences are the length of a paragraph. In places you use the same word multiple times in a single sentence (e.g. "entire"). Your sentence structure is abysmal. Finally, your use of complex adjectives next to seldom-used nouns makes for difficult reading.Taken together, these characteristics make your editorial difficult to read. They diminish the impact of the actual content.



    Strive for clarity. Permit only one idea per sentence. Avoid using too many adjectives for dramatic effect. These suggestions should help you communicate your thoughts more clearly.

    I agree.

     

    DED provides too much information to digest all at once, but it is an end of year summary. 

     

    Ironically, DED could build a very good year end summary with links to the year's AI articles in iBook format. A huge level of effort, but would there be a payoff even with a token price like $5 on the iBook Store?

  • Reply 118 of 257
    tmay wrote: »
    Gee, it isn't enough that there are so many me-too apps from developers already, but now you want to open up the Walled Garden to uncertified crap? I'll bet those unprofitable devs would be unprofitable on any platform. Maybe they should consider other lines of work?

    Here's a hint; don't like the App Store rules? Google play awaits.

    That's not my point. My point is that developers would make money with or without the walled garden, Apple doesn’t make the money for them.
  • Reply 119 of 257
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    tmay wrote: »
    Uhm, more like Apple doesn't need to compete on pure hardware specs because they aren't in the Android market and don't have to compete with Android OEM's at that level. Apple came out with the 64bit because they had and have plans to take advantage of it today and into the futue. More to the point, all of the Android OEM's target low, mid and high end sales; Apple sells only premium smartphones.

    News; those flagship phones from vendors other than Samsung (let's just say $10B a year in marketing) don't sell enough for the OEM's to make a profit, and Google subsidizes its Nexus phones. As for commoditization, bet that the Android OEM's and Samsung are suffering much more than Apple.
    my point is fashion/lust/desirability are going to become more and more important for Apple. That's where Jony Ive and Angela Ahrendts come in to play. Make Apple products fashion statements that people want/have to own.
  • Reply 120 of 257
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tmay View Post



    Gee, it isn't enough that there are so many me-too apps from developers already, but now you want to open up the Walled Garden to uncertified crap? I'll bet those unprofitable devs would be unprofitable on any platform. Maybe they should consider other lines of work?



    Here's a hint; don't like the App Store rules? Google play awaits.




    That's not my point. My point is that developers would make money with or without the walled garden, Apple doesn’t make the money for them.

     

    Then why are they developing apps for iOS?  If you are correct then they don't need the Apple ecosystem and, in fact, would be better off without it since then they would not have to give up 30% of their profit.

Sign In or Register to comment.