Your confusion is understandable. I suspect that Intel is very afraid that one of the heavy hitters in the computer business is selling tens of millions of iPad computers each year, that is also being embraced by enterprise, and doesn't have a single Intel chip inside. Sure, Intel could make those ARM chips for Apple, and Apple did try to get them to do so, but then Intel couldn't charge the same fat margins they get on the x86 chips they put into PCs. Additionally, there is always the change that once iPad sales are as big as PC sales (2018), Apple would have the clout to turn out a MBA packaged iPad and really shut Intel's money machine down. With IBM throwing their weight behind Apple that tipping point could happen even sooner.
Here's a factor that isn't often brought up; the cost of a business to house an employee within their own facility is enormous. Even with the reduced work station footprint of 4 x 5 feet (20 square feet) and then add an additional 20 square feet for hallways and common areas (these are minimal numbers), you have a total of 40 square feet of footprint that needs to be paid for, heated, lighted, air-conditioned, cleaned and maintained. This space continues to exist even if the enterprise owner lays off the employee. Now, assign a number to the space. Let's use $50 per square foot per month, and we got a fixed cost of $2000 per employee (and remember, I'm using minimum numbers here)
Now imagine you have that employee work from home. You save $2000 per month at a minimum of fixed building costs (and it's likely to be several times that amount). You still save additional monthly costs of large lit parking lots and extra expansion space. Now, here's the real nut of it all: what's the cost of an iPad in all this? Even if you have each employee come in one day a week, you've still cut your fixed operating expenses into a fifth of what they otherwise would be.
Um, I work from home several days a week. An iPad will never replace my need for a laptop (sorry Tim) unless I have the ability to dock it so I can use it with a monitor and keyboard. Also, a lot of work I do is in Excel and SQL Server. How does that get done on an iPad? How many of the 100s of enterprise apps Apple and IBM are developing will be developed on the iPad? I think the several quarters of YOY decline in iPad sales shows we're no where near post-PC. And I think Apple needs more than A8 and Touch ID to jump iPad sales. Hopefully it comes on the software side this fall.
People were saying the same thing about laptops (not enough power, can't run all programs) when it first came out.
Again this is about VISION. Some people have it, some people don't.
Maybe early senility, but I don't recall anyone saying anything about a laptop not having enough power, can't run all programs. Even if it was said that must have been a long, long time ago. It is not a matter of vision, it is a matter of being realistic. There is a proper tool for each task and trying force one tool to do another's job is foolish. An iPad is like a Crescent wrench. Hardly a replacement for a proper set of sockets and spanners.
People were saying the same thing about laptops (not enough power, can't run all programs) when it first came out.
Again this is about VISION. Some people have it, some people don't.
Unless the iPad becomes a hybrid type device, it won't replace most serious business usage. Nor do Apple expect it to. They make the analogy between trucks and cars - the PC being a truck i.e. used for work, with most people needing cars to get around but not for work. Thats a fine analogy, but it still means some people continue to need trucks, like Rogifan who is talking about his work environment. SQL server will never work on an iPad. xCode will never run on an iPad. The list of what will never run on an iPad is massive.
if you think the iPad can replace all business use, you are thinking Hybrid. But Apple is not going down that route. There is room for iPads in the enterprise, for salesmen, presentations and so on. Although any serious device for work needs more flash space. Thats coming. Whats not coming is hybrid car-trucks, or iPads replacing all business use.
Not long ago, I read where Apple, unlike it competitors, reported "sell-through" quantities not "shipped" quantities. Is this still the case and is there a definitive link to this? TY.
A (fact-based, scientifically arrived at) approximation is NOT THE SAME as an opinion.
For the past two Presidential elections, for example, I avidly read Nate Silver and Nate Cohen, followed various polling over months. In 2008 I correctly predicted the results in 49 of 50 states. In 2012, I was 50 for 50. So, in the last two elections combined I have a 99% accuracy rate.
Now, let's be fair: It really isn't difficult to predict what's going to happen in CA or MS. That leaves us with the 10-ish "swing states" to really have to make any sort of choice. Out the ~20 swing states that were up for grabs in the two elections, I am 19-20. I incorrectly gave NC to McCain in 2008.
In today's final Singles at the LPGA International Crown (that's golf), there were 10 Singles matches. I was 10-10.
An informed prediction is a HELL OF A LOT different than an opinion.
An opinion is something like "Blake Lively has amazing legs," (well, that's practically FACT, but anyways ...) or "Hunger Games" was better than "Catching Fire."
Nope. An informed opinion/prediction is still an opinion until it is proven.
So its okay to count PC tablets and netbooks as PC sales but not iPads as Mac sales? What a bunch of poppy cock! And then to come to a totally bogus conclusion on Mac sales and outright lie that PC sales have gone up. Something is very wrong with Gartner and IDC. I will no longer trust or believe anything Gartner and IDC have to say anymore just like Consumer Reports. These 3 now have a reputation for prejudice against Apple. Lying about Apple products in there reports will get them no where because Apple will report the truth in the end. If they get paid for there reports by vendors then it is more obvious that they will try and side with those that pay the most. Samsung is known for lies about its benchmarks for its devices. So its no surprise that Apple is portrayed as lower in there reports because I don't think Apple pays anything to Gartner or IDC.
Without Apple breaking out regional sales, there really is nothing to support the authors wish that their data was wrong. If you read Tim's statement he never says the achieved double digit growth in the US. He says they achieved double digit growth across many countries, the subset of which includes the US. So basically China and India could have made up for the shrinkage in the US and his statement would be validly true even though it has a little DED like misdirection. He was also very explicit in stating 32 of 33 quarters of growth in *global* market share.
If their numbers are pure fiction DED should get on the hotline with Tim and tell him to stop referencing IDC data in his calls.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Confirmation bias (not bias confirmation) much?
Without Apple breaking out regional sales, there really is nothing to support the authors wish that their data was wrong. If you read Tim's statement he never says the achieved double digit growth in the US. He says they achieved double digit growth across many countries, the subset of which includes the US. So basically China and India could have made up for the shrinkage in the US and his statement would be validly true even though it has a little DED like misdirection. He was also very explicit in stating 32 of 33 quarters of growth in *global* market share.
If their numbers are pure fiction DED should get on the hotline with Tim and tell him to stop referencing IDC data in his calls.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
\
Hey, tooltalk, it might help to reread what Cook said in the conference call.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
If you want to hear more about how IDC invents its figures to achieve a particular number, you can read the ex-IDC analyst describing how in the re
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
I know you are a troll account, but "Apple spokesman Steve Dowling confirmed Monday that the growth was double digit (i.e. 10% or more) in each of those markets" - Fortune.
Without Apple breaking out regional sales, there really is nothing to support the authors wish that their data was wrong. If you read Tim's statement he never says the achieved double digit growth in the US. He says they achieved double digit growth across many countries, the subset of which includes the US. So basically China and India could have made up for the shrinkage in the US and his statement would be validly true even though it has a little DED like misdirection. He was also very explicit in stating 32 of 33 quarters of growth in *global* market share.
If their numbers are pure fiction DED should get on the hotline with Tim and tell him to stop referencing IDC data in his calls.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
\
Hey, tooltalk, it might help to reread what Cook said in the conference call.
You may want to as well, since Cook said none of the items that he is quoted as having said =P
Numbers aren't jiving in my read. According to DED's article "Globally, Apple reported that Mac sales jumped from 3.75 million to 4.41 million year-over-year for its fiscal Q3, a unit increase of 18 percent and a new June quarter record" At the same time Maestri apparently reported that China's Mac sales were up 39% YOY. :???: That would eat up more than half the Mac sales increase reported wouldn't it?
"But it was the [B]39 per cent increase in MacBook and iMac sales in China [/B](according to CFO Luca Maestri in a Reuters interview) which showed how far Apple has engaged more consumers on the back of demand for the iPhone and iPad. That is especially true on the mainland, the world's biggest market for personal computers.
If the China comments were accurate I don't see where there was room for double-digit growth in all these other markets cited in the AI article seeing as overall worldwide sales were up only 18%. Perhaps I'm just confused and misreading numbers since afterall it is a Monday after a really good weekend.
Maybe Sog or one of our other numbers guys can make sense of it.
You may want to as well, since Cook said none of the items that he is quoted as having said =P
Perhaps your ability to deconstruct a simple sentence in the English language is far more sophisticated than mine, but as the article notes (you can also look up the conference call transcripts): "Tim Cook specifically noted, "we achieved strong double digit Mac growth across many countries, including the U.S., Canada, Mexico, the UK, Germany, France, Australia, China, India and the Middle-East" during the company's earnings call.""
Apple could have easily grew Mac sales 39% in China AND double digit growth in the USA if the China units were relatively small.
That's all there is to it. (Moreover, to suggest -- as some have -- that Tim Cook could not be telling the truth about something like that in an analyst call setting is ludicrous, given the risks it poses to the company and to him personally)
"We achieved strong double digit Mac growth across many countries, including the U.S. Canada, Mexico, the UK, Germany, France, Australia, China, India and the Middle-East. "
Apple could have easily grew Mac sales 39% in China AND double digit growth in the USA if the China units were relatively small.
Apple's China's Mac numbers last year were reported to be 1.8M (from the SCMP link). . If they're truly up 39%, or about 700K wouldn't that account for the entire worldwide sales increase of around 660K and then some? The numbers just aren't making sense to me.
Does 660K units allow for almost 40% increase in China Mac sales PLUS at least 10% more in the US, PLUS at least 10% more in Canada PLUS at least 10% more in 7 other regions pretty much covering all of Apple's largest markets? I'm thinking maybe there's some apples and oranges discussed in the conference call. Perhaps Cook is citing some different time frame or different comparables than Maestri was in the conference call?
Nope. An informed opinion/prediction is still an opinion until it is proven.
An opinion, pretty much by definition, can never be proven.
"Baseball is better than football." Prove it (or disprove it). Now, if someone said something like, "Baseball is a more popular sport than football in the US," that can easily be disproven by any number of metrics. But that's because there are FACTS involved. But, "Marlowe was a better writer than Shakespeare, " while being a fairly unpopular and fringe opinion (which, nonetheless is still held by some) cannot ever be proven or disproven. It's just up to the tastes of the individual reader.
A prediction is not synonymous with an opinion. A prediction, assuming the person has some background and foundation in the area being discussed, is envisioning what is a LIKELY outcome of events. This prediction is based on history, facts, trends, and an understanding of the area being discussed.
For instance, if Clayton Kershaw is pitching for the Dodgers against a rookie who had a 4.78 ERA and a 1.30 WHIP in the minors, and also had a less than 2-1 K/BB ratio, the PREDICTION that LA is going to win is a fairly solid one, based on given evidence. Does it mean that there is a 100% that the Dodgers will win? No. It just means that it's HIGHLY LIKELY given everything we know (both about the individuals involved and about baseball in general -- how games often revolve around the strength of the starting pitching, for instance).
No one ever said that a (well-arrived at) prediction is a fact. I just said that a prediction is not the same as an opinion.
Um, I work from home several days a week. An iPad will never replace my need for a laptop (sorry Tim) unless I have the ability to dock it so I can use it with a monitor and keyboard. Also, a lot of work I do is in Excel and SQL Server. How does that get done on an iPad? How many of the 100s of enterprise apps Apple and IBM are developing will be developed on the iPad? I think the several quarters of YOY decline in iPad sales shows we're no where near post-PC. And I think Apple needs more than A8 and Touch ID to jump iPad sales. Hopefully it comes on the software side this fall.
I don't disagree, I use my MBP for tons of stuff, I tend to use my iPad Air for Netflix and checking mail and reading mostly. That's kind of what Apple has always espoused, use the right tool for the right job. They don't make a hybrid piece of crap that fails at both like Microsoft. That said there are literally limitless used for iPads in input scenarios, just not for what i do nor probably what you do. That's the beauty of Apple's range of products. My nMac Pro is currently cranking out 4K video and uploading while I type this on my MBP. My Mac mini is running Yosemite and Yosemite Server and CrushFTP and my iPad is by the bed ready for when I turn in. :smokey:
Comments
People were saying the same thing about laptops (not enough power, can't run all programs) when it first came out.
Again this is about VISION. Some people have it, some people don't.
Maybe early senility, but I don't recall anyone saying anything about a laptop not having enough power, can't run all programs. Even if it was said that must have been a long, long time ago. It is not a matter of vision, it is a matter of being realistic. There is a proper tool for each task and trying force one tool to do another's job is foolish. An iPad is like a Crescent wrench. Hardly a replacement for a proper set of sockets and spanners.
Never is a very long time.
People were saying the same thing about laptops (not enough power, can't run all programs) when it first came out.
Again this is about VISION. Some people have it, some people don't.
Unless the iPad becomes a hybrid type device, it won't replace most serious business usage. Nor do Apple expect it to. They make the analogy between trucks and cars - the PC being a truck i.e. used for work, with most people needing cars to get around but not for work. Thats a fine analogy, but it still means some people continue to need trucks, like Rogifan who is talking about his work environment. SQL server will never work on an iPad. xCode will never run on an iPad. The list of what will never run on an iPad is massive.
if you think the iPad can replace all business use, you are thinking Hybrid. But Apple is not going down that route. There is room for iPads in the enterprise, for salesmen, presentations and so on. Although any serious device for work needs more flash space. Thats coming. Whats not coming is hybrid car-trucks, or iPads replacing all business use.
Not long ago, I read where Apple, unlike it competitors, reported "sell-through" quantities not "shipped" quantities. Is this still the case and is there a definitive link to this? TY.
Windows is very profitable.
OSX is free.
Not that it's particularly relevant, but "free when you buy a >$500 computer" is not really free.
...for Microsoft.
Nope. An informed opinion/prediction is still an opinion until it is proven.
What a bunch of poppy cock! And then to come to a totally bogus conclusion on Mac sales and outright lie that PC sales have gone up. Something is very wrong with Gartner and IDC.
I will no longer trust or believe anything Gartner and IDC have to say anymore just like Consumer Reports. These 3 now have a reputation for prejudice against Apple. Lying about Apple products in there reports will get them no where because Apple will report the truth in the end. If they get paid for there reports by vendors then it is more obvious that they will try and side with those that pay the most. Samsung is known for lies about its benchmarks for its devices. So its no surprise that Apple is portrayed as lower in there reports because I don't think Apple pays anything to Gartner or IDC.
Without Apple breaking out regional sales, there really is nothing to support the authors wish that their data was wrong. If you read Tim's statement he never says the achieved double digit growth in the US. He says they achieved double digit growth across many countries, the subset of which includes the US. So basically China and India could have made up for the shrinkage in the US and his statement would be validly true even though it has a little DED like misdirection. He was also very explicit in stating 32 of 33 quarters of growth in *global* market share.
If their numbers are pure fiction DED should get on the hotline with Tim and tell him to stop referencing IDC data in his calls.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Confirmation bias (not bias confirmation) much?
Without Apple breaking out regional sales, there really is nothing to support the authors wish that their data was wrong. If you read Tim's statement he never says the achieved double digit growth in the US. He says they achieved double digit growth across many countries, the subset of which includes the US. So basically China and India could have made up for the shrinkage in the US and his statement would be validly true even though it has a little DED like misdirection. He was also very explicit in stating 32 of 33 quarters of growth in *global* market share.
If their numbers are pure fiction DED should get on the hotline with Tim and tell him to stop referencing IDC data in his calls.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
\Hey, tooltalk, it might help to reread what Cook said in the conference call.
...for Microsoft.
Obviously.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
If you want to hear more about how IDC invents its figures to achieve a particular number, you can read the ex-IDC analyst describing how in the re
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
I know you are a troll account, but "Apple spokesman Steve Dowling confirmed Monday that the growth was double digit (i.e. 10% or more) in each of those markets" - Fortune.
Go back under your bridge.
Without Apple breaking out regional sales, there really is nothing to support the authors wish that their data was wrong. If you read Tim's statement he never says the achieved double digit growth in the US. He says they achieved double digit growth across many countries, the subset of which includes the US. So basically China and India could have made up for the shrinkage in the US and his statement would be validly true even though it has a little DED like misdirection. He was also very explicit in stating 32 of 33 quarters of growth in *global* market share.
If their numbers are pure fiction DED should get on the hotline with Tim and tell him to stop referencing IDC data in his calls.
Welcome to AppleInsider. This is quite amusing how Apple fanbois collectively fail to distinguish between the US sales by IDC and Apple's announced Global sales. I've noticed in other forums they tend to emphasize US sales figure over global ones -- especially when citing Samsung's 2012 sales -- or whenever it suits their argument. Bias confirmation much?
\Hey, tooltalk, it might help to reread what Cook said in the conference call.
You may want to as well, since Cook said none of the items that he is quoted as having said =P
"But it was the [B]39 per cent increase in MacBook and iMac sales in China [/B](according to CFO Luca Maestri in a Reuters interview) which showed how far Apple has engaged more consumers on the back of demand for the iPhone and iPad. That is especially true on the mainland, the world's biggest market for personal computers.
[B]Cook said the Mac line showed "some substantial strength" amid a slowdown in personal computer shipment growth in most markets worldwide[/B]. "China was projected to contract by 5 per cent," he said."
http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/1557739/halo-effect-iphone-ipad-lifts-mac-computer-sales-china
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/22/us-apple-results-china-idUSKBN0FR2CU20140722
If the China comments were accurate I don't see where there was room for double-digit growth in all these other markets cited in the AI article seeing as overall worldwide sales were up only 18%. Perhaps I'm just confused and misreading numbers since afterall it is a Monday after a really good weekend.
Maybe Sog or one of our other numbers guys can make sense of it.
You may want to as well, since Cook said none of the items that he is quoted as having said =P
Perhaps your ability to deconstruct a simple sentence in the English language is far more sophisticated than mine, but as the article notes (you can also look up the conference call transcripts): "Tim Cook specifically noted, "we achieved strong double digit Mac growth across many countries, including the U.S., Canada, Mexico, the UK, Germany, France, Australia, China, India and the Middle-East" during the company's earnings call.""
Add: I see that sog35 beat me to it.
Apple could have easily grew Mac sales 39% in China AND double digit growth in the USA if the China units were relatively small.
That's all there is to it. (Moreover, to suggest -- as some have -- that Tim Cook could not be telling the truth about something like that in an analyst call setting is ludicrous, given the risks it poses to the company and to him personally)
Apple's China's Mac numbers last year were reported to be 1.8M (from the SCMP link). . If they're truly up 39%, or about 700K wouldn't that account for the entire worldwide sales increase of around 660K and then some? The numbers just aren't making sense to me.
Does 660K units allow for almost 40% increase in China Mac sales PLUS at least 10% more in the US, PLUS at least 10% more in Canada PLUS at least 10% more in 7 other regions pretty much covering all of Apple's largest markets? I'm thinking maybe there's some apples and oranges discussed in the conference call. Perhaps Cook is citing some different time frame or different comparables than Maestri was in the conference call?
Nope. An informed opinion/prediction is still an opinion until it is proven.
An opinion, pretty much by definition, can never be proven.
"Baseball is better than football." Prove it (or disprove it). Now, if someone said something like, "Baseball is a more popular sport than football in the US," that can easily be disproven by any number of metrics. But that's because there are FACTS involved. But, "Marlowe was a better writer than Shakespeare, " while being a fairly unpopular and fringe opinion (which, nonetheless is still held by some) cannot ever be proven or disproven. It's just up to the tastes of the individual reader.
A prediction is not synonymous with an opinion. A prediction, assuming the person has some background and foundation in the area being discussed, is envisioning what is a LIKELY outcome of events. This prediction is based on history, facts, trends, and an understanding of the area being discussed.
For instance, if Clayton Kershaw is pitching for the Dodgers against a rookie who had a 4.78 ERA and a 1.30 WHIP in the minors, and also had a less than 2-1 K/BB ratio, the PREDICTION that LA is going to win is a fairly solid one, based on given evidence. Does it mean that there is a 100% that the Dodgers will win? No. It just means that it's HIGHLY LIKELY given everything we know (both about the individuals involved and about baseball in general -- how games often revolve around the strength of the starting pitching, for instance).
No one ever said that a (well-arrived at) prediction is a fact. I just said that a prediction is not the same as an opinion.
I don't disagree, I use my MBP for tons of stuff, I tend to use my iPad Air for Netflix and checking mail and reading mostly. That's kind of what Apple has always espoused, use the right tool for the right job. They don't make a hybrid piece of crap that fails at both like Microsoft. That said there are literally limitless used for iPads in input scenarios, just not for what i do nor probably what you do. That's the beauty of Apple's range of products. My nMac Pro is currently cranking out 4K video and uploading while I type this on my MBP. My Mac mini is running Yosemite and Yosemite Server and CrushFTP and my iPad is by the bed ready for when I turn in. :smokey: